Greek Maritime History: From the Periphery to the Centre 9004467718, 9789004467712, 9789004467729

Table of contents :
Illustrations
Tables
Weights And Measures
Notes on Contributors
Chapter 1. Introduction: Re-Conceptualising Greek Maritime History
Chapter 2. Greek Maritime History: Navigating Greek Historiography in Domestic and International Waters
Chapter 3. From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism: Research in the Early Modern Maritime History of the Greek Subjects of Venice
Chapter 4. Caught Between Empires: Agency, Neutrality and a Middleman Minority
Chapter 5. Piracy in the Aegean: Aspects and Contradictions of Stereotypes
Chapter 6. The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century: Introducing the Black Sea Historical Statistics, 1812–1914
Chapter 7. The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea: Port Policy, Traffic, Infrastructure in the Port of Theodosia, 1895–1913
Chapter 8. Beyond the Mediterranean: Greek Family Business and the Familiarity of the Black and Azov Seas Maritime Space
Chapter 9. The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece in the Nineteenth Century
Chapter 10. The Introduction of Maritime Technology in Greek Fisheries: Diving Suites in Sponge Fishing in the Aegean
Chapter 11. Business Groups’ Diversification Strategy: The Case of Ralli Bros Diversifying in Shipping
Chapter 12. Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century: The Human Resources
Chapter 13. The Development of Naval History in Greece, 1989–2020
Epilogue. Greek Maritime History or Maritime History of the Greeks?
Index of Terms and Institutions
Index of Names
Index of Places

Citation preview

Greek Maritime History

Brill’s Studies in Maritime History Series Editor Gelina Harlaftis, Institute for Mediterranean Studies/Foundation of Research and Technology – Hellas (FORTH) and University of Crete Editorial Board Maria Fusaro, University of Exeter, U.K. Michael Miller, University of Miami, U.S.A. Sarah Palmer, University of Greenwich, U.K. Amélia Polónia, University of Porto, Portugal David Starkey, University of Hull, U.K. Malcolm Tull, Murdoch University, Australia Richard W. Unger, University of British Columbia, Canada

volume 11

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/bsmh

Greek Maritime History From the Periphery to the Centre Edited by

Katerina Galani Alexandra Papadopoulou

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Cover illustration: Carte-postale of the Steamship Odysseus (1903), owned by the Dracoulis family, from the island of Cephalonia (Ionian Sea). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Galani, Katerina, 1981– editor. | Papadopoulou, Alexandra, editor. Title: Greek maritime history : from the periphery to the centre / edited by Katerina Galani, Alexandra Papadopoulou. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, [2022] | Series: Brill’s studies in maritime history, 2405–4917 ; vol.11 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2021058935 (print) | LCCN 2021058936 (ebook) | ISBN 9789004467712 (hardback) | ISBN 9789004467729 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Navigation—History. | Navigation—Greece. | Greece—History, Naval. Classification: LCC VK75 .G74 2022 (print) | LCC VK75 (ebook) | DDC 387.5/09495—dc23/eng/20211202 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021058935 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021058936

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. ISSN 2405-4917 ISBN 978-90-04-46771-2 (hardback) ISBN 978-90-04-46772-9 (e-book) Copyright 2022 by Katerina Galani and Alexandra Papadopoulou. Published by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Hotei, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau and V&R unipress. Koninklijke Brill NV reserves the right to protect this publication against unauthorized use. Requests for re-use and/or translations must be addressed to Koninklijke Brill NV via brill.com or copyright.com. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Contents List of Illustrations vii List of Tables viii Weights And Measures ix Notes on Contributors x 1 Introduction: Re-Conceptualising Greek Maritime History 1 Katerina Galani and Alexandra Papadopoulou 2

Greek Maritime History: Navigating Greek Historiography in Domestic and International Waters 8 Gelina Harlaftis

3

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism: Research in the Early Modern Maritime History of the Greek Subjects of Venice 52 Gerassimos D. Pagratis

4

Caught Between Empires: Agency, Neutrality and a Middleman Minority 76 Katerina Galani

5

Piracy in the Aegean: Aspects and Contradictions of Stereotypes 105 Dimitris Dimitropoulos

6

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century: Introducing the Black Sea Historical Statistics, 1812–1914 124 Alexandra Papadopoulou and Socrates Petmezas

7

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea: Port Policy, Traffic, Infrastructure in the Port of Theodosia, 1895–1913 150 Anna Sydorenko

8

Beyond the Mediterranean: Greek Family Business and the Familiarity of the Black and Azov Seas Maritime Space 180 Evrydiki Sifneos

9

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece in the Nineteenth Century 191 Apostolos Delis

vi

Contents

10

The Introduction of Maritime Technology in Greek Fisheries: Diving Suites in Sponge Fishing in the Aegean 232 Evdokia Olympitou

11

Business Groups’ Diversification Strategy: The Case of Ralli Bros Diversifying in Shipping 256 Katerina Vourkatioti

12

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century: The Human Resources 276 Ioannis Theotokas

13

The Development of Naval History in Greece, 1989–2020 294 Zisis Fotakis



Epilogue: Greek Maritime History or Maritime History of the Greeks? 331 Katerina Galani and Alexandra Papadopoulou



Index of Terms and Institutions 337 Index of Names 341 Index of Places 344

Illustrations

Figures

7.1

Exports of Evpatoria, Sevastopol and Theodosia, 1856–1913 (in French gold francs) 155 7.2 Comparative view of total exports and total grain exports of the Theodosia, 1856–1914 (in French gold francs) 168 7.3 Destination countries of grain exports from Theodosia, 1896–1907 169 11.1 Profit – loss (£) of MSTC vs Ralli Bros group (1951–60) 268 11.2 Profit – loss MSTC in comparison to bulk carriers’ freight rates, 1951–60 272



Maps

2.1 3.1 7.1

Maritime Regions in the Mediterranean 39 The geography of the maritime trade of the Ionian State 70 Port cities, administrative division and railway network of South Russia, early twentieth century 160 9.1 The first four lines of HSNC, 1856 213 9.2 Extension of Lines and Destinations (1887–8) 215

7.1 7.2 7.3

Pictures General view of the port city of Theodosia, end of the nineteenth century 162 Railway lines crossing the city, end of the nineteenth century 163 The port area, end of the nineteenth century 165

Tables 2.1 7.1 7.2 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 11.1 11.2 11.3 12.1 12.2 12.3

Maritime Databases in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, 1700–2000 16 Ratio of grain freights arriving by rail and exports from Theodosia, 1894–1913 (in tons) 173 Grain exporters in Theodosia, 1910–13 175 Percentage of the total revenues of voyages of the HSNC per line 216 The fleet of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company, 1855–60 219 Steamers integrated in the company’s fleet in the period 1881–7 220 Crews of the Steamers 1866 and Elpis 1904 221 The career and fate of the steamers of the HSNC 223 Invested capital of leading Far Eastern companies, 1830–1954 (Company’s capital in million £) 262 Ralli Bros’ group personnel, 1951 266 MSTC’s fleet from 1942 up to 1961 266 The size of Greek-owned shipping companies (1969–2010) 280 Place of origin of Greek seafarers, 1930, 1959, 1980, 1998, 2006 286 Greek and Foreign seafarers on Greek and Greek-owned (linked with the National Pension Fund) 288

Weights And Measures 1 metric ton = 1,000 kilogrammes 1 lb = 453.6 g 1 hectolitre (hl) = 100 litres 1 chetvert (четверть)= 2.10 hl = 5.77 British imperial bushels = 5.96 US bushels 1 British imperial quarter = 28 lb = 12.7 kg 1 pud (пуд) = 16.38 kg 1 km= 1,000 m 1 verst = 1,066.8 m 1 oka = 1.28 kg 1 hectare (ha) =10,000 m2 1 state desiatina = 1.0925 ha 1 landlord desiatina= 1/3 state desiatina 1 dönüm = 918 m2 = 0.092 ha 1 dekar = 1.000 m2 1 stremma = 1.000 m2

Notes on Contributors Apostolos Delis is Researcher of Maritime History at IMS/FORTH. He is specialized in the maritime technology of sail and steam, navigation and other aspects of shipping business in the Mediterranean. He has published various works in Greek, English and French. Dimitris Dimitropoulos Ph.D. (1996), is Research Director at the Institute of Historical Research of the National Hellenic Research Foundation. He has published monographs and articles on social and economic history and the Greek War of Independence (1821). Zisis Fotakis is Assistant Professor in Naval History and the Director of the Naval History Research Laboratory at the Hellenic Naval Academy. His monograph, Greek Naval Strategy and Policy, 1910–1919, was published in 2005 by Routledge and received favourable reviews. Katerina Galani Ph.D. (2011), Oxford University, is Post-Doctoral Researcher at the Institute for Mediterranean Studies and teaches Economic and Social History at the Hellenic Open University. In 2012, she was awarded the Frank Broeze Prize by the International Maritime History Association. Her publications include British Shipping in the Mediterranean during the Napoleonic Wars (Brill, 2017). Her recent work involves the formation of the port-city of Piraeus during the industrialization and the naval and merchant fleet during the Greek War of Independence (1821–1831). Gelina Harlaftis is Professor of Maritime History at the University of Crete and Director of the Institute for Mediterranean History/FORTH. Evdokia Olympitou (1962–2011†) was Associate Professor of Ethnology at the Ionian University, Greece. She has published extensively on the insular communities of the Aegean Sea, where she studied demographics, labour history, history of fishing and the socio-economic effects of proto-industrialisation on maritime populations.

Notes on Contributors

xi

Gerassimos D. Pagratis Ph.D. (2001), National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, is Professor of Italian History at that University. He has published monographs and many articles on the Venetian maritime state, the maritime history of Greeks under Venetian rule, Early Modern Italian History etc. Alexandra Papadopoulou Ph.D. (2011), Ionian University, is currently Post-Doctoral Researcher at the Institute for Mediterranean Studies. She published “Foreign merchant business and the integration of the Black and Azov Seas of the Russian Empire into the First Global Economy” (Business History 2012). Her areas of specialization are economic and social history of the 18th and 19th century in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Her research interests are related to the evolution of Greek maritime communities during the 18th and 19th centuries and the role of shipping in the economic integration of the Black Sea in the 19th century. Socrates Petmezas is Professor of Modern Economic and Social History, University of Crete. He has published extensively on the History of Greece and the Ottoman Balkans (18th–20th centuries). His areas of specialization are proto-industrialization, rural history, Greek historical statistics, and social history of ideas. Evrydiki Sifneos (1957–2015†) was Research Director at the Institute of Historical Research of the National Hellenic Research Foundation. Her research interests involved business history and the history of industrialization in the Aegean islands, the history of the Black Sea, and Greek Diaspora. Anna Sydorenko Ph.D. (2017) Ionian University, is Post-Doctoral Fellow in the Institute for Mediterranean Studies/FORTH. Her research interests involve port history, social and economic history of Eastern Europe and history of Greek diaspora. She has participated in research projects on maritime history. Ioannis Theotokas Ph.D. (1997) is Professor of Shipping Management at the University of Piraeus. He has published articles in international journals and books on Management, Strategy and HRM in shipping, including Management of Shipping Companies (Routledge, 2018).

xii

Notes on Contributors

Katerina Vourkatioti Ph.D. (2004) is specialized in the history of Greek companies active in Britain and South East Asia in the 19th and early 20th century. She has published on Greeks in the Anglo-Indian seatrade and has been working in the banking sector for over two decades.

Chapter 1

Introduction: Re-Conceptualising Greek Maritime History Katerina Galani and Alexandra Papadopoulou Greek-owned shipping holds a leading position in global shipping in the world’s dry bulk fleet and the world’s tanker fleet. The extraordinary course of the Greek shipping industry worldwide has attracted a great deal of public attention, especially in contrast to the small size of the Greek national economy. The ascendancy of shipping since the eighteenth century went hand-in-hand with a delayed if not marginal industrialisation, poor economic performance in the rest of the national productive sectors and recurrent insolvencies up until the recent default of the 2010s. The contradiction of a nation that is small in spatial terms, yet has a big impact in the maritime realm, as has also been the case for Norway, has led to the invention of the so-called ‘miracle of Greek shipping’ narrative. Due to the lack of a concrete scientific approach, the analysis of this impressive growth of the Greek shipping industry has relied mostly on a variety of traditional, if not metaphysical, interpretations such as the charisma of individual entrepreneurs or a genetic predisposition of Greeks towards the sea and the maritime industry that is still resonant to the present day. The introduction of Greek Maritime History to academia in the 1990s counterposed a coherent scientific approach for the study of the historical evolution of the shipping industry. Over the last decades, Greek Maritime History has carved an impressive course. From a handful of studies, dispersed and fragmented, maritime historiography grew into a prolific and comprehensive body of literature. Most importantly, Greek Maritime History, in its current state, seems to be mature and well equipped enough to encompass the multilevel human interaction with the sea and fertilise the international agenda, methodology and research. Furthermore, it provides an interpretational framework which is not exhausted in the Greek paradigm but can be implemented in different geographical, temporal and cultural contexts. The international recognition of Greek Maritime History as a discrete scientific field lies behind the initiative for this volume, which dates back several years and belongs to the late Skip Fischer, professor at the Memorial University of Newfoundland. Fischer, due to his devotion and deep understanding of

© Katerina Galani and Alexandra Papadopoulou, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_002

2

Galani and Papadopoulou

maritime history, as well as his perception of the field as editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Maritime History over several decades, had realised that Greek maritime historiography had flourished and borne fruit, and that a comprehensive presentation of its findings was timely. The chapters of this volume reflect the multidimensional, comparative, interdisciplinary and intertemporal capacity of Greek maritime historiography. The scope spans from the sixteenth to the twentieth century, as well as from the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea to the Atlantic and the Indian Ocean. Furthermore, it covers a wide range of topics, from business history, technology and innovation to colonial and diaspora studies, naval history, fishing, maritime communities, shipping and trade. This book brings together a wide group of historians, researchers and scholars at different stages of their careers, who have been engaged in topics that are closely related to maritime history. Over the last years, under the inspiration of Gelina Harlaftis, who holds the sole chair of Maritime History in Greece, a wide community of researchers and scholars identify themselves as maritime historians and as such have been engaged in a systematic and continuous interaction with international academia. In an otherwise introverted historical community in Greece, Maritime History has become an exception, a forum to develop international dialogue and collaboration. The boom of Maritime History and the rising interest among younger scholars and historians have created an academic cluster that is recently housed at the designated Centre of Maritime History of the Institute of Mediterranean Studies (IMS) in Crete, under the directorship of Gelina Harlaftis. Maritime studies in Greece are in a reciprocal relationship with the international agenda and have contextualised existing approaches towards Maritime History. The most resonant is the history of seas and oceans – that is, thalassology  – which looks at the perception of the sea, beyond political borders. The sea is not conceived as a mere space that surrounds the land, but as a dynamic agent of change. This approach has been mostly implemented in the history of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea and has triggered a level of interaction between Maritime History and other academic disciplines, such as Economic Geography, Economic Sociology and Environmental History. Another central analytical tool has been the social and economic networks that organised and coordinated trade and shipping through the formation of local, peripheral and international transport systems. Networks promoted the connectivity of people and places and lie at the foundations of the business organisation of shipping and trade. Furthermore, networks have revealed the role of the small maritime communities of the Aegean and the Ionian seas that emerged during the sailing-ship era, in the making of Greek shipping. Beyond

Introduction

3

the history of major ports, the study of seafaring communities has been critical in deepening our understanding of the ‘geography’ and roots of powerful European shipping. Furthermore, it opens up new potential for interregional and transnational comparisons and brings about new questions on the existence of a common pattern of maritime development among Europe’s seas (the Mediterranean, North Sea, Baltic, and so on). The relation between modern shipping and globalisation has been another aspect of the growing interest in Greek maritime historiography. The international expansion of commercial and shipping networks was a crucial factor in the emergence of shipping as a global business, and in the role of sea transport in global interconnectedness. Research on the consolidation and connectivity of local, peripheral and international transport networks that extended beyond the maritime region of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black and Azov seas towards Western Europe and the Atlantic Ocean has been crucial in explaining the rise of modern Greek shipping. The interplay between shipping and globalisation is reflected in recent studies conducted on the level of the markets, by probing maritime regions and their share of the global maritime industry, as well as on the level of the firms, mostly of diaspora entrepreneurs who have acted as architects of transnational networks. The development of Maritime Studies was embedded in a concrete methodology, formulated over the years, revolving around different themes and approaches, as has been briefly discussed above. The sea, the maritime communities and the ship have developed into independent units of analysis, while in the heart of Greek maritime historiography lies a thick analysis that has instigated both quantitative and qualitative interpretations. A definitive factor in the development of Maritime Studies has been the outreach to primary sources, which entailed the collection, synthesis and management of corpora of archives and primary material. An abundance of maritime archives were scattered across the maritime communities of the Aegean and the Ionian seas and were left unexplored. In addition, an unprecedented outreach for archival sources was launched in major Mediterranean, Atlantic, Northern European and Black Sea ports following the routes of Greek ships in international destinations. This overwhelming task became feasible through large-scale research projects and international collaborations that combined macro and micro analysis in order to frame the larger picture but also cast light on the qualitative features of Greek shipping. The management and process of such a rich and versatile material and the homogenisation of the data was made feasible through the creation of maritime databases. The design of the databases was conceived through collaboration and juxtaposition with other large-scale quantitative projects in Maritime History such as the Atlantic Canada Shipping Project, the

4

Galani and Papadopoulou

Navigocorpus and the ‘Sound Toll Registers’ project. Greek Maritime History has developed two distinct yet interconnected types of databases: the first handles statistical series which capture the fleet, journeys, commodities and crews. The second kind of database is prosopographical, oriented towards the social and economic profile of Greek merchants and shipping groups and their operations on an international level. Gelina Harlaftis deservingly holds the first main chapter in this volume. In a dense description of the evolution of Maritime Studies in Greece and its current situation in research and teaching, she encapsulated the central methodological issues of the last decades of research and the consolidation of models applied to conceptualise the history of Greek shipping. She provides a synopsis of the main research findings, which have challenged long-standing impressions in the existing historiography, relating and justifying the growth of Greek shipping in the eighteenth century. The earliest contribution in this volume belongs to Gerassimos Pagratis, a medievalist and early modern historian of the Venetian Republic. He presents recent findings on Greek shipping in the Ionian Sea, under the Venetian rule and the Septinsular Republic, while he offers a critical survey of the early modern historiography, pointing out the prevailing topics and approaches, as well as their strengths and limitations. Furthermore, the author investigates the circumstances that fostered the formation of Ionian shipping businesses, taking into consideration the social, political and economic implications. Katerina Galani addresses one of the key comparative advantages of the Greeks in the Mediterranean of the early modern period: their role as intermediaries in the empires. Finding their way through the cracks of the system, they became the principal sea carriers of the Ottoman Empire in the eighteenth century, and acted as economic brokers – that is, as agents and partners – for Western traders operating in the Levant. Through the records of the British Levant Company, Galani shows how local agents were the nodes of the networks that connected the Mediterranean with the international markets, conveying intelligence, capital and commodities while becoming the bearers of change, promoting free trade and contributing to the decline of chartered monopolies and empires. Dimitris Dimitropoulos raises the issue of the perils of the sea in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries through the records of the Aegean Islands, with an eye to demographic, social and economic changes. Drawing upon contemporary sources and the existing literature, he challenges the long-standing negative assertions on piracy and corsairing and proposes a wider interpretation that encompasses the different nuances of the terms and practices across time and space.

Introduction

5

Three chapters in this volume form a distinct thematic unit and are dedicated to the study of the Black Sea and the Azov Sea, mirroring the growing interest of Greek historians in this maritime region over the last decades. The rise of modern Greek shipping since the late eighteenth century has been intertwined with the development of the Black Sea as an international market. Therefore, the Black Sea economy has been placed at the centre of historical research by examining its position and relations with international trade, the rise of diaspora merchant communities and their role as conduits of trade and shipping to the global economy, the economic development of port cities and the formation of transport networks. The chapter by Alexandra Papadopoulou and Socrates Petmezas presents the series of the ‘Black Sea Historical Statistics’ (BSHS) that span from 1812 to 1914. BSHS was created as part of a larger interdisciplinary project and focuses mostly on providing hard evidence on the development of trade and shipping from and to the Black Sea for over a century. The BSHS is embedded in two doctrines of Greek Maritime History: (1) a holistic approach to the history of this maritime region through its connections and dependencies with the world; and (2) the commitment to long-term statistical series through the compilation and homogenisation of different archival sources. Anna Sydorenko examines the development of port systems on the south coast and their connection with the hinterland and foreland during the integration of the Black Sea market in the global economy. Through the case study of Theodosia in the Crimea, the chapter follows the construction and operation of a port that served grain exports and probes the political, economic and geo-political factors that promoted its development. The importance of the Black Sea in the development of Greek shipping is further analysed by Evrydiki Sifneos, an esteemed colleague who sadly passed away during the preparation of this book. Sifneos had worked extensively on the multifaceted history of the Black Sea, and while her previous papers adopt a rather macroscopic approach, her contribution enriches the collection of this book with a microscopic view on port history and business history. She examines the city of Taganrog in the Azov Sea, which hosted a sizeable maritime community of the Greek diaspora, and more precisely a family firm trading between the Black Sea and the European markets. Technology and innovation as a lever of growth for the Greek maritime economy in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is discussed by Apostolos Delis and Evdokia Olympitou. While the bulk of maritime historiography is skewed towards the era of sails, Delis focuses on the early stages of steam shipping in Greece through the records of the first Hellenic Steam Navigation Company. During thirty years of service, the chapter argues, the Company

6

Galani and Papadopoulou

contributed to the diffusion of innovation in iron shipbuilding and marine engineering in Greece. At the same time, it introduced passenger shipping, the modernisation of maritime communications and the geographical cohesion of the Greek state and its connection to international markets. Olympitou is a rare example of a scholar engaged in the study of fishing in Greek historiography. The chapter was originally written in Greek and was translated for the purposes of this volume after her sudden death. In this chapter, she describes the adoption of new techniques in sponge fishing in the islands of the Aegean. The author examines the introduction and the establishment of a mechanical diving method, the so-called ‘skafandro’, that intensified production while at the same time evoking a range of social and economic changes in the sponge-diving populations of the Aegean. The strand of business history and its fruitful cooperation with maritime history is addressed in two different chapters. Focusing on a case study from the Greek diaspora, Katerina Vourkatioti investigates the evolution of family business into international business groups. Vourkatioti, through the rich and understudied business archive of the Ralli Bros, probes one of the most prominent families of the Greek diaspora, who flourished within the context of the British Empire in the twentieth century. In this chapter, the author identifies and analyses the strategy of diversification from trade to shipping as a means of expansion and survival of the business group. Shipping remains a powerful economic sector in the modern era. The competitive advantage of Greek shipping in the twentieth century is investigated by Ioannis Theotokas through the factor of human resources. Entrepreneurs who engage in the shipping market, seafarers and crews and shipping officers ashore create a critical resource for Greek shipping, with a cost-effective operation and management of the fleet that overcomes disadvantages related to capital shortage. Last but not least, this volume on Greek maritime historiography could not be complete without a mention of naval history. The inclusion of a chapter on Greek naval history in this collective volume is a conscious choice, as maritime history at its core encompasses human interaction with the sea in its totality. The traditional isolation of naval studies as an academic discipline in Greece destined solely for naval academies, is partly responsible for the slow and unstable development of the field over the last decades and its limited outreach. The relationship between the navy and merchant marine is perennial. As was demonstrated in a recent research project that co-examined for the first time the function of the merchant and naval fleet during the Greek War of Independence (1821–31), the interaction between maritime and naval

Introduction

7

history could benefit both sides and broaden the scope of interest.1 Zisis Fotakis focuses on the development of modern naval history in Greece over the last quarter century in the light of corresponding international developments. He explains the limited interest of Greek academia in naval history and presents its corresponding accomplishments and omissions. He also sketches the substantial interest in modern naval history of the Greek public and the Ministry of Defence, whose service historians and retired naval officers have treated this field of study with some success. The doubling numbers of maritime museums in Greece and the substantial expansion and better preservation of Greek naval records could promote further research into modern naval history in the country. 1 Katerina Galani and Gelina Harlaftis (eds), Το εμπορικό και πολεμικό ναυτικό κατά την Ελληνική Επανάσταση, 1821–1831 [The Merchant and Naval Fleet during the Greek War of Independence, 1821–1831] (Heraklion: Crete University Press, 2021). The book published the results of a three-year project conducted in the Ionian University and the Institute of Mediterranean Studies-FORTH.

Chapter 2

Greek Maritime History: Navigating Greek Historiography in Domestic and International Waters Gelina Harlaftis In a novel called Little England, which takes place in Andros, one of the most prominent seafaring islands of the Cyclades, a seaman’s wife lost her mind after the drowning of her husband; she wandered in the island for the rest of her life, always turning her back to the sea.1 I cannot think of anything more dramatic than to live on an island and try to avoid the sea that surrounds it. If you are Greek, you cannot avoid the sea, since our history is very much connected to it. Most Greek historians, however, have kept – and keep – writing the history of the Greeks with their backs turned to the sea, a sea that has defined, and still defines, Greek history: its economy, society, politics, mentality, culture. Despite its importance, Maritime History did not exist as a separate field of research or teaching in Greek academia until 1990. Even today, although it has been taught in four Greek universities, it is still considered ‘exotic’, and is not fully accepted in Greek curricula. Past and current trends in maritime historiography have proved that those who steal a glance at the sea in the course of their studies can offer a fresh perspective.2 The field provides another dimension to economic and social history, to political or cultural history, to urban or labour history. If it has taken at least one generation for this to be recognised as a worthwhile field, it will take another generation before it becomes established in Greek universities. In the meantime, Maritime History in Greece has taken off in research projects and publications on an international and comparative level, promoting international communication, academic dialogue and exchange of ideas. 1 Ioanna Karystiani, Μικρά Αγγλία [Little England] (Athens: Kastaniotis, 1997). 2 Starting with Fernand Braudel’s Mediterranée, and the School of Annales (Braudel 1949), historical analyses that deploy particular seas as analytical units have been written by a number of scholars. See Peregrine Horden and Nicholas Purcell, The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2000); Michael Pearson, The Indian Ocean (London & New York: Routledge, 2003);  David Abulafia, The Great Sea: A Human History of the Mediterranean (London: Penguin Books, 2011); Michael North, The Baltic. A History (Cambridge M.A., 2015); Alexis Wick, The Red Sea. In search of Lost Space, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2016); David Abulafia, The Boundless Sea: A Human History of the Oceans (London: Allen Lane, 2019). © Gelina Harlaftis, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_003

Navigating Greek Historiography

9

Back in the 1970s, Maritime History on an international level comprised a handful of academics pursuing their personal research interests in diverse universities. It has since acquired all the attributes of a fully fledged discipline. It now boasts a large international group of academics that call themselves maritime historians, specialist international journals (like the International Journal of Maritime History), international conferences, an extensive historiography, professional maritime history associations, dedicated research centres, degree courses provided by professors in Maritime History, and an exceptional richness of accessible primary sources.3 What is more, the history of the seas and oceans has become very much en vogue in the last two decades as specialists of various disciplines have produced a large bibliography forming a significant corpus of literature in this area, described as ‘thalassology’ (thalassa in Greek means ‘sea’).4 This trend, which has steadily grown in the last two decades, has been a source of both delight and frustration for maritime historians. Delight because the sea has been brought to the centre of current historiography: according to maritime history, the history of the sea examines human activities of all kinds related to the sea  – economic, social, political, cultural, environmental  – and their impact on human societies. Frustration because many scholars, particularly geographers, anthropologists, cultural historians, use the sea as space, just replacing the area studies, ‘baptising’ them as ‘history of the seas’ without

3 About the organisation of Maritime History, see David M. Williams and Lars U. Scholl, ‘Lewis R. Fischer and the Progress of Maritime Economic History’ in Gelina Harlaftis, Stig Tenold and Jésus M. Valdaliso (eds), World’s Key Industry: History and Economics of International Shipping (London: Palgrave, 2012), 11–28. See Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Περί Ιστορίας και Ναυτιλίας’ [About History and Shipping] in Gelina Harlaftis (ed.), Ιστορία και Ναυτιλία [History and Shipping] (Athens: Alexandria, 2001); Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Storia marittima e storia dei porti’ in Memoria e Ricerca, vol. 2 (September–October 2002), 5–21; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Maritime History Since Braudel’, Proceedings, 4th International Congress of Maritime History, Corfu 21–27 June 2004, International Maritime Economic History Association (IMEHA), CD (Corfu, 2005). A large part of the previous introduction has been incorporated into Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassalo, ‘Maritime History Since Braudel’ in Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassalo (eds), New Directions in Mediterranean Maritime History, Research in Maritime History, no. 28 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2004), 1–19; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Greek Maritime History Steaming Ahead’ in Harlaftis and Vassalo (eds), New Directions in Mediterranean Maritime History, 135–49; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘“L’histoire maritime en Grèce”, La recherche internationale en histoire maritime: essai d’évaluation’, Revue d’histoire maritime 10–11 (2010), 75–97; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘The Maritime Historiography of Greece since 1975’ in Frank Broeze (ed.), Maritime History at the Crossroads, Research in Maritime History, no. 9 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 1995), 135–49; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Greek Maritime History Steaming Ahead’ in Harlaftis and Vassalo (eds), New Directions in Mediterranean Maritime History, 135–49. 4 Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Maritime History or the History of thalassa’ in Gelina Harlaftis et al. (eds), The New Ways of History (London: IB Tauris, 2009), 211–38.

10

Harlaftis

really changing anything.5 But the ‘true’ history of the sea is when the sea is used as a dynamic agent of change and not just as a space; only then does history go beyond borders and transcend the history of a nation or a people.6 Maritime History has strengths that help to formulate the outlook of history, as will be indicated in a later section. The aim of this chapter is to indicate the importance of Maritime History in the interpretation of Greek history in its ‘domestic waters’ and beyond Greece, within the ‘international waters’: the wider Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea and all the oceans. It follows the course of research in Maritime History in Greece in the last thirty years, reviewing the main questions posed, upon which collective research projects were built – based on collaborations with all the authors of this volume – and scholarly work produced.7 Maritime History brought a new perspective to Greek historiography and strengthened its importance on an international level. Greek Maritime History is, at the moment, among the few branches of modern Greek historiography that participate in the international academic discourse. The chapter starts with the key questions and thematics that have guided research in Maritime History in Greece since 1990. We consider 1990 as a turning point for Maritime History in Greece, as it was then introduced as an independent field taught in the Greek universities.8 Up until then, there was no concept of Maritime History in Greek academia, although a number of important studies had been undertaken on the relation of Greeks to the sea, as part 5 Martin W. Lewis and Kären Wigen, ‘A Maritime Response to the Crisis in Area Studies’, The Geographical Review 89/2 (April 1999), 161–8. 6 Gelina Harlaftis, ‘The True History of the Sea: A Maritime History: A New Version of the Old Version’, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 383–402; Harlaftis, ‘Maritime History or the History of thalassa’, 211–38. 7 About development of Maritime History in Greece until the turn of the twenty-first century, see Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η Ναυτιλιακή Ιστορία “εν πλω και υπ’ατμόν”’ [Maritime History ‘at Sea and on Steam’] in Paschalis Kitromilidis and Triantafyllos E. Sklavenitis (eds), Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδος, 1833–2002 [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece, 1833–2002], Proceedings, vol. Β (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 425– 45; Harlaftis, ‘The Maritime Historiography of Greece since 1975’; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Ελληνική Ναυτιλιακή Ιστορία, όρια και πηγές’ [Greek Maritime History, Limitations and Sources], Ta Iστορικά [Ta Historica] 8 (1991), 14–15. 8 Maritime History has been taught as a separate field of history at an undergraduate and graduate level in the Department of Maritime Studies of the University of Piraeus since 1990; in the Department of Trade, Shipping and Transport of the University of the Aegean since 1999; in the Department of History of the Ionian University between 2003 and 2019; in the Department of History and Archaeology of the University of Crete since 2019. It has also been taught online alongside mainstream subjects since 2019.

Navigating Greek Historiography

11

of the national narrative.9 Maritime History has grown to incorporate economic and social history relating to business history, and maritime economics. Greek Maritime History grew hand-in-hand with the growth of the history of diaspora communities or Greek ‘merchant colonies’, as they were traditionally called.10 It also relates to Ottoman and Venetian history.11 Up to the formation of the Greek state, Greeks lived under the Ottoman Empire and Venetian Empire and had formed merchant colonies in the main port cities from southern Russia to the Western Mediterranean and Northern Europe. They had excelled in both sea and land trade in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea and in Eastern Europe and had transformed themselves to main carriers of the trade of the Ottoman, Russian and Habsburg empires. When the Greek state was formed in 1830 it had about one million inhabitants, with another two million living in the rest of the Ottoman Empire and a few hundred thousand in the Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires and Egypt. The intersection of Greek shipping and Greek diaspora communities created the concept of Greek entrepreneurial networks, which in turn provided the tools to interpret the links between expatriate Greeks – that is, Greeks that lived ‘outside’ the Greek kingdom – and the home-based Greeks ‘inside’ the Greek kingdom.12 This relation is very important in order to understand the development of the Greek economy. The small Greek kingdom was a weak state, relying on agriculture and shipping for its income without any 9

10

11

12

For a review of Greek Maritime History, see Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η Ναυτιλιακή Ιστορία “εν πλω και υπ’ατμόν”’ [Maritime History ‘at Sea and on Steam’], 425–45; Harlaftis, ‘The Maritime Historiography of Greece since 1975’; Harlaftis, ‘Ελληνική Ναυτιλιακή Ιστορία’, 14–15. See also Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Ottoman History, Neohellenic History, and Maritime History on the “Dispersed City” of the Islands of the Ottoman Empire’, Turkish Historical Review, 11 (2020), 101-117. For a recent review, see Katerina Galani, ‘Η Ελληνική κοινότητα του Λονδίνου τον 19ο αιώνα. Μια κοινωνική και οικονομική προσέγγιση’ [The Greek Community in London in the 19th Century: A Social and Economic Approach], Τα Ιστορικά [Ta Historika] 63 (April 2016), 43–68; and Viktor Zakharov, Gelina Harlaftis and Olga Katsiardi-Hering (eds), Merchant ‘Colonies’ in the Early Modern Period (15th–18th Centuries) (London: Chatto & Pickering, 2012), Introduction. Important discussion on Greek historiography in Olga Katsiardi-Hering and Vaso Seirinidou (eds), Νεοελληνική Ιστορία και Οθωμανικές Σπουδές [Neohellenic History and Ottoman Studies], Dept of History and Archaeology (Athens: University of Athens, 2017). The volume that brings together and combines the above disciplines is Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821: The Heyday before the Greek Revolution] (Athens: Kedros Publications, 2013). Elli Skopetea, To ‘Πρότυπο Βασίλειο’ και η μεγάλη ιδέα [The ‘Model’ Kingdom and the Great Idea] (Athens: Polytypo, 1988).

12

Harlaftis

real industrial sector until the last third of the nineteenth century. Its largest capitalists, international merchants, bankers and shipowners lived outside its borders in the big cities of the Eastern Mediterranean (Constantinople, Smyrna, Alexandria), the Black Sea (in Odessa, Taganrog and Braila), the Western Mediterranean (Trieste, Livorno, Genoa, Marseille) and Northern Europe (London, Paris, Amsterdam, St Petersburg). The entrepreneurial networks of the international Greek trading houses became the starting point, the vehicle, that integrated the Greek economy into the European economy. Whether living abroad or in Greece, a large number of powerful Greek businessmen from the diaspora kept close links with the Greek state, and to many diaspora entrepreneurs it proved a safe abode. After all, until the interwar period this was a period of political upheavals, wars, revolutions and disasters, and the dawn of the twentieth century brought unprecedented state changes, including the dissolution of the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires, with dramatic effects on the populations. The Greek economy profited from the existence of international Greek trading and shipping companies, who invested in the Greek secondary and tertiary sectors; in the industry and shipbuilding, in banking and insurance. Capital from international trade and shipping has provided a constant flow of income to the Greek economy, from the formation of the Greek state to the present day. Greeks presently (and for the last fifty years) own the largest fleet in the world, which they operate from Piraeus/Athens. The sections that follow deal with the questions posed, the research and methodology undertaken, the findings and interpretations published. They cover issues dealing with the importance of shipping within Greece and beyond Greece – within the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, all European seas and all oceans. They seek to answer why Greek maritime companies were so successful within domestic and international waters and how they became one of the world’s main agents of globalisation; how their global success affected the local, national and European economy and maritime tradition; how the study of the Greeks as European and global carriers intersects with the study of the history of a sea (that is, the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea) and its global economic integration; and how it contributes to the formation of a methodology to approach the history of a sea. The chapter ends by presenting the new Centre of Maritime History at the Institute for Mediterranean Studies (IMS), part of the Foundation of Research and Technology (FORTH) in Crete – a centre of excellence that fosters vibrant new international projects on the maritime history of the Mediterranean and the Black Sea and its linkages to the other seas and oceans.

Navigating Greek Historiography

1

13

Research Questions and Methodology

The innovative contribution of Maritime History to Greek history and, more widely, Mediterranean and Black Sea history, is the very essence of the maritime dimension: the sea is regarded as a main agent of change, vital for economic viability and development. Research in Greek Maritime History in the last thirty years has developed through a few key questions/thematics. 1) The importance of shipping in Greece was examined, as well as its impact on the national economy in the second half of the twentieth century. How large was the fleet of the Greeks, what was the connection of the Greek shipowners with Greece and what investments did they make in the Greek economy? 2) Research was undertaken on the spectacular development of Greek shipping companies in the twentieth century. Who were the Greek shipowners and where were their shipping firms? Where did they come from and what connection did they have with Greek seamen? Why were they so important and how did they influence world shipping and create global shipping? 3) The third theme dealt with the importance of shipping beyond the boundaries of the Greek state in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: the entrepreneurial networks they formed, which empire(s) and states they served. Linked to this were the Greek diaspora merchant communities based in Europe’s main port cities since at least the eighteenth century. 4) The fourth question related to the islands of the Ionian and Aegean seas that developed as maritime communities. It examined the island maritime communities and why they were so important to the Greek shipping firms up to the end of the twentieth century; it further looked at their developmental patterns in response to political, economic and technological developments. It also examined the Greek seafaring labour in the maritime islands and their connection to the ship-owning companies. 5) The fifth question dealt with developing a more general history of the sea. The Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea were selected as a unit of research and the research expanded to beyond the Greeks. An approach was developed through the study of maritime regions, the formation of land/river/sea transport systems, port cities, trade and shipping, and entrepreneurial networks. Since the 1980s, research in Maritime History has introduced a new methodology to Greek historiography, using new information technologies along with new concepts and interpretations. The use of new technologies, the formation of extensive databases and the use of a combination of trans-local and

14

Harlaftis

transnational archival sources from various countries and different languages had never been applied before on such a scale and in such a systematic and organised way, with the use of large multiethnic and multilingual teams. Research in Maritime History thrived, but not without problems. There were many historical and methodological obstacles to overcome. A researcher in Greek Maritime History back in the 1980s and 1990s had to face the complete lack of systematic official shipping statistics in the early modern and modern periods. Another problem was selecting ‘who was Greek’. Most Greeks that lived in the Eastern Mediterranean in the eighteenth century were Ottoman or Venetian subjects. In the nineteenth century they were Ionian/British subjects (the Ionian Islands were united with Greece after 1864, following a period of British rule), Greek subjects (after 1830) and Ottoman subjects. In the twentieth century the Greeks of the Eastern Mediterranean were mainly Greek subjects, Italian subjects (having been colonised by Italy, the Dodecanese Islands were handed back to Greece after World War II) and Turkish subjects (after the Greco-Turkish War in 1922 there was a huge and forced exchange of populations between Turkey and Greece). What is more, in the nineteenth century there were diaspora Greek communities with large populations in the Black Sea port cities and the Balkans that were Russian, Austrian and Romanian subjects, and groups in Western Europe that were Italian, French and English subjects. I have addressed this problem by using criteria of maritime entrepreneurship: beyond any identity issues, to be ‘Greek’ in maritime business had to do with a common maritime business culture and economic survival in the international arena. ‘Greek’ ships under any flag were selected from the archives across centuries according to the name of the ship, the name of the captain, or the shipowner and shipping company of islands and coastal towns. Another issue was the flag and the use of the term ‘Greek-owned’. Greeks during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries used the Ottoman, Venetian, Maltese, Ionian, Austrian, British, French, Russian and Tuscan flags, along with the flags of Jerusalem, Moldavia, Wallachia and, later, Romania. During the twentieth century, Greeks used the flags of Greece, Britain, the United States, Egypt, Panama, Liberia, Honduras, Canada, Cyprus, the Isle of Man, Vanuatu, Bermuda, Costa Rica, Lebanon, Malta, Bangladesh, Cayman Islands, Marshall Islands, St Vincent, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, the Bahamas and Hong Kong, to name but a few. I addressed this problem by using the post-World War II concept of the ‘Greek-owned’ fleet, the beneficial ownership of a vessel. This means that we regard as ‘Greek’ ships under the Greek and any foreign flag that are administered by shipping companies owned by Greek shipowners. This concept solved the problem of tracing the ownership of the vessel. The construction of a database of ‘the Greek-owned fleet’ proved painstaking, as it was built ship-by-ship and evidence was amassed from a number of sources, from many countries.

Navigating Greek Historiography

15

Last but not least, there was another important problem that had to be faced: the issue of archives. Where can one find evidence of Greek-owned ships, routes, cargoes, shipowners, seamen and their place of origin, as Greeks were subjects of various states and empires and ploughed many seas and oceans? This problem was resolved by broadening the archival research and the compilation and combination of many European archives in many ports; port arrivals were registered along with navigation permits, port customs, classification societies, chambers of commerce, and so on, supplemented from Greek port authorities’ archives, notaries and private ship-owning archives after the formation of the Greek state. For the purpose of comparison, not only Greek voyages or ships were counted, but also all ships that travelled in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea (see, for example, the databases Poseidon and Black Sea). 2

The Research Projects

Nine research projects have been created since the 1990 to answer the above questions. They are all Maritime History projects based on long-term research by large teams, financed by private funds, like the Onassis and Niarchos Foundations, by national funds, like the Greek Ministry of Development and the Greek Ministry of Education, and European funds, like the European Research Council. As an outcome of the research projects, five groups of databases have been constructed, as Table 2.1 indicates, based on archives from Austria, Bulgaria, France, Greece, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Romania, Russia, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom and United States and: the first group deals with the identification of the Greek-owned fleet; the second group of databases collected voyages of Greek-owned ships; the third group of databases includes material of Greek maritime communities; the fourth on Greek diaspora merchants; and the fifth group systematic evidence on Black Sea and Mediterranean fleets, ship voyages and navigation, merchants, ports and seamen. Their results have enhanced our knowledge on Mediterranean and Black Sea history during the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. They are used for the analyses and interpretations of the authors in this volume. As Table 2.1 indicates, the first group of databases (Pontoporeia I and Pontoporeia II) includes Greek-owned ships under any flag between 1830 and 2000 registered in specific ports and/or owned by Greek-owned shipping companies. The entries contain the names of ships, the tonnage in gross registered tonnage and net registered tonnage, the type of ship, the flag, the place of registry, the date and place of shipbuilding, the captain, the ship-owning company, the name of the shipowners, the places of establishment of shipping agencies. These two databases gave us the backbone of Greek-owned shipping,

16 Table 2.1

Harlaftis Maritime databases in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, 1700–2000

Categories/names Period of databases 1. Greek-owned ships aPontoporeia I (1) 1830–1939 (at ten-year intervals)

Number Type of archives of entries (selected)

20,000

1945–2000 (at ten-year intervals)

25,000

2. Greek Voyages aAmphitrite (2)

1700–1821

15,000

Ifestion (3)

1821–31

Pontoporeia II (1)

7,105

Nationality of archives

Greek state ship registries and Classification Societies (Lloyd’s, Bureau Veritas, Lloyd Austriaco), Commercial Newspapers Classification Society Lloyd’s, Private Maritime Register Skolarikos

Austrohungarian, British, French, Greek

Sanitá Archives of main Mediterranean port cities, Ottoman Navigation permits, Amsterdam municipal insurance archives Customs, State newspaper of the United States of the Ionian Islands (Gazzetta Uffiziale degli Stati Uniti delle Isole Jonie), Greek Provisional Government state records, Ministry of Naval Affairs records, Prize court records

Dutch, French, Greek, Italian, Maltese, Spanish, Turkish

British, Greek

Greek, Ionian

17

Navigating Greek Historiography Table 2.1

Maritime databases in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, 1700–2000 (cont.)

Categories/names Period of databases Poseidon (4)

1830–1910

3. Greek maritime communities Ionian Islands – 1820–59 Odysseas (5) (at five-year intervals)

Spetses – Dievo (5)

1827–80

Syros – Margitsa (5)

1830–70

4. Greek diaspora merchants Greeks of Azov (6) 1795–1914

1840–50 Greek Merchant Banking – London, Constantinople (7) 1858–82 Accounts of Vagliano Brothers in the Bank of England (7)

Number Type of archives of entries (selected)

Nationality of archives

40,000

British Customs Bills of Trade, French commercial newspaper

British, French

19,985

State newspaper of the United States of the Ionian Islands (Gazzetta Uffiziale degli Stati Uniti delle Isole Jonie) Notarial Archives of the General State Archives of Spetses Notarial Archives of the General State Archives of Syros

Ionian

Port Customs, Guild lists, Governor Reports of the State Archives of Rostov Region Account Ledgers of the Archives of the Bank of England Account Ledgers of the Archives of the Bank of England

Russian

6,508

1,882

10,000

100,000

Greek

Greek

British

British

18 Table 2.1

Harlaftis Maritime databases in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, 1700–2000 (cont.)

Categories/names Period of databases 5. The sea Black Sea (8) 1780s–1910s aBlack Sea – Jason aBlack Sea – Argo Black Sea – Golden Fleece Black Sea – Argonauts Black Sea – Medea

Number Type of archives of entries (selected)

2,700 2,200 24,000 22,106 6,060

aBlack Sea Historical Statistics

Mediterranean and Black Sea SeaLit – FastCat (9)

Under construction

Nationality of archives

Archives of the Russian Department of Foreign Trade of the Ministry of Finances; Bulgarian Statistical Service; Statistical Bureau of the Direction of Trade of the Romanian Ministry of Industry and Trade; British, French and American Consular Reports; Archives of the Greek Church Agia Trias of Odessa; Archives of the Centro de Estudios Migratorios Latinoamericanos

Argentinian, American, British, Bulgarian, French, Greek, Romanian, Russian, Turkish, Ukrainian

Shipping business papers (Ship logbooks, account ledgers etc); maritime community notarial archives; state seafaring labour archives; populations censuses

French, Greek, Italian, Spanish, Ukrainian

a Published in www.marehist.gr and/or in www.blacksea.gr Source: The numbering (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9) refers to equivalent research projects. See Appendices. For the sources of the each database see www.blacksea.gr

Navigating Greek Historiography

19

as they provided all necessary information about the ships, the places, the shipowners. As already mentioned, until the formation of these two databases, there were no overall detailed statistics on the Greek-owned fleet which flew under many flags. The registers had to be mainly constructed by French, Austro-Hungarian, British and Greek classification societies (see Appendix 2.1). Pontoporeia I, which covers the period 1830–1939, is a historical ship registry that contains the first systematic statistical series of the Greek-owned fleet from the beginning of the Greek state to World War II. The database contains 20,000 registries of Greek-owned sailing ships and steamships, on a five-year interval. Pontoporeia I revised and expanded our knowledge about the development of Greek-owned shipping, particularly during the era of the sailing ship’s great prosperity. As a continuation, Pontoporeia II was constructed for the period 1945–2000, in collaboration with the maritime economist Ioannis Theotokas. The database has more than 25,000 entries, and it forms the only systematic database on Greek-owned shipping, constructed every five years for the second half of the twentieth century (see Appendix 2.1). The second group of databases, as Table 2.1 shows, are Amphitrite I, Amphitrite II and Poseidon, which give us the ship voyages, the routes, the cargoes and the shipping companies for the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, through arrivals and departures between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea and the West. More importantly, they provided the evidence to map entrepreneurial networks. The database, Amphitrite, revealed the voyages of the Greeks during the eighteenth century and up to 1821 (see Table 2.1). This database includes 15,000 voyages of Greek-owned ships (subjects of the Venetian, Ottoman, Russian and other empires) in Mediterranean ports from 1700–1821 (see Appendix 2.2). Amphitrite has provided an incredible wealth of information for the maritime economic activities of the Ottoman and Venetian/Ionian Greeks during the eighteenth century up to the Greek War of Independence in 1821. This database offered the possibility of quantitatively analysing the voyages of the Greeks in the Western Mediterranean port cities but also the chance to estimate fairly the fleet of the Greeks according to the island/port of origin, from 1700 to 1821. The database, Ifestion, with more than 10,000 data entries, is currently under construction and contains the voyages of the Greek-owned ships during the Greek Revolution, 1821–1831, the Greek merchants that traded during the Revolution, navigation permits from the Revolutionary Government and the Greek naval and merchant fleet. This project focused on the different uses of vessels amid the Greek War of Independence, for example commercial, naval, as privateers or corsairs, and so on (see Appendix 2.3).

20

Harlaftis

The database, Poseidon, includes 40,000 entries covering the voyages of ships of all nationalities from the main port cities of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea to Marseille and London (see Table 2.1). It contains data on arrivals of ships in London (every five years, i.e. 1830, 1835, 1840, etc.), as published in the British Customs Bills of Entry, and in Marseille, as published in the shipping and commercial French newspaper, Semaphore de Marseille. These voyages contain valuable information, based on which the entrepreneurial networks of Greek shipowners and merchants could be identified (see Appendix 2.4). The third group of databases, concerns Greek maritime communities (see Table 2.1), and includes three databases constructed from the archives of maritime islands: the Ionian Islands, Spetses and Syros. Odysseas is a database that contains 19,985 arrivals to the Ionian Islands for the years 1820–59 at five-year intervals (from the Ionian Archives in Corfu). It is based on ships’ arrivals at the Ionian Islands from the Gazzetta degli Stati Uniti delle Isole Jonie/Gazzette Jonica.13 It brings out the importance of the Ionian Islands, under the British rule, as a hub of international shipping and the expansion of the voyages of the fleets of the Ionian Islands and particularly those of Cephalonia. Margitsa is a database that contains 6,508 entries from the archives of Syros. It is based on notarial deeds, mainly ship registrations, shipbuilding certificates, shipbuilding agreements, contracts and property acts, from the island’s archives. The study of this material brought out the importance of the main nineteenth-century Greek maritime centre, the island of Syros. It is the only study on maritime Syros, the main shipbuilding centre of the Eastern Mediterranean, and one of the most important ones in all the Mediterranean.14 Spetses was the third most important Greek maritime centre of the Greek state in the nineteenth century (after Syros and Galaxidi). Dievo is a database of 3,900 notarial acts on the shipping companies of the island of Spetses for the period 1830–70, a quantifying synthesis of qualitative evidence such as ship guarantees, contracts of shipbuilding, formation and dissolution of companies, ship sale and purchase, appointment of shipmasters, maritime loans, proxies, and so on. This database brought out the importance and wealth of notarial archives in the study of the maritime island communities and provided the first complete study of the maritime business group of a Greek island, on the island, in domestic waters and in international waters. Furthermore, the study traces the first approach of

13 14

The database was formed by Panayotis Kapetanakis within the Research Programme ‘Greek Maritime Centres in the 19th Century’. See Appendix 2.5. The database was formed by Apostolos Delis within the Research Programme ‘Greek Maritime Centres in the 19th Century’. See Appendix 2.5.

Navigating Greek Historiography

21

the evolution of the Greek shipping company in the heyday of the sailing era, through an in-depth analysis of shipping enterprises in the island of Spetses.15 The fourth group of databases is on Greek diaspora merchants. Until the 1980s, Greeks ‘outside’ the Greek state were studied in what was called the history of Greek ‘merchant colonies’, and such studies neither made connections between the merchant colonies themselves, nor highlighted their importance in the Black Sea ports, nor linked them with the history of the Greek state.16 Parallel research in shipping and the diaspora communities since the 1990s brought out their interlinkages and the common origin of the main diaspora merchant and shipping families from the Aegean and Ionian Islands, their importance in the Black Sea port cities and their connections with the Greek state. A research project in the Russian and Ukrainian Azov port cities carried out between 2008 and 2011 indicated the mine of information about the importance of the Greeks in shipping and trade and the formation of the Azov port cities of Russia and Ukraine and provided the sixth database, Greeks of Azov. The extremely rich Russian archives of the Azov were entirely under-researched by non-Russian scholars. The Russian Empire had a strong bureaucracy and state mechanisms that collected reports on a monthly and annual basis from all its provinces. The research project, carried out in the Russian archives of Rostov-on-Don and Taganrog, gave valuable information on the Greek merchant families established there; almost all hailed from the Aegean and Ionian Islands (see Appendix 2.6). Further, the project provided the tools to proceed to the next important step, the formation of the Black Sea project as described below. Shipping and trade went hand-in-hand with finance and banking, and thus further research was carried out to trace the financial networks of the Greeks in Istanbul and London, the main financial centres of Eastern and Western Europe. If Russian archives exposed the significance of Greek merchants in the South Russian ports, research in the Archives of the Bank of England revealed abundant data on the Greek merchant bankers in London. It is important to note that the Greek bankers in the City of London were all members of prominent merchant families established in Russia. Another research project on Greek merchant banking, carried out during 2011–14, took place with extensive research in the Archives of the Bank of England (Appendix 2.7).17 The database, Greek Merchant Banking: London, Constantinople, includes more 15 16 17

The database was formed by Alexandra Papadopoulou within the Research Programme ‘Greek Maritime Centres in the 19th Century’. See Appendix 2.5. See ‘Introduction’ in Zakharov, Harlaftis and Katsiardi-Hering, Merchant ‘Colonies’ in the Early Modern Period. Postdoctoral programme titled ‘From Constantinople to the City of London: Greek Bankers, 1820–1880’, with Dr Katerina Galani as the postdoctoral researcher. See Appendix 2.7.

22

Harlaftis

than 10,000 entries from the Archives of the Bank of England, mostly from the 1840s and 1850s (see Table 2.1). It contains qualitative and quantitative data from the series of the Bank of England’s Discount Office, which includes customers’ ledgers, regulations, procedure and practices, and so on. Further detailed research was conducted for the Vagliano Bros, a company that was one of the biggest bankers, shipowners and merchants in the City of London and southern Russia. Their detailed daily transactions were monitored in selected years in the period between 1858 and 1881 (Appendix 2.7). The fifth group of databases, as Table 2.1 indicates, collected data that not only targeted the Greeks, but expanded to all nationalities involved in shipping and trade in the Black Sea and the European Mediterranean. The Black Sea database includes data on the economic and social history of twenty-four Black Sea port cities from the 1780s to the 1910s, mainly concerning arrivals and departures of ships, registration of the merchant fleets, shipowners, merchants, immigration, exports and imports of cargoes (Appendix 2.8).18 The aim of the project was the identification, analysis and synthesis of the twenty-four port cities of the Black Sea, most of which formed an integrated market and became the larger grain-exporting area in the world from the second half of the nineteenth century until the beginning of the twentieth century. By placing in the centre of the analysis the sea, the sea routes and its ports, the study delves into the economic activities of the port cities, the coastal area and the hinterland and explores the integration of markets and their interlinkages with the global economy, beyond political boundaries and divisions. New primary research included the combination of archives for all port cities and the collection of statistics from archival sources from ten countries (see Table 2.1). The aim was to (a) provide rich and multifaceted databases for the port cities of the Black Sea region, in which documentation from local archives and different ethnic languages is combined and translated into a common language; and (b) form processed homogeneous statistical databases of imports and exports in value and quantity, shipping arrivals and departures from each port city from a combination of available contemporary statistics. To that end, the Black Sea database contains six databases: (1) Black Sea Historical Statistics, 1813–1914; (2) Jason database, 1810s–1910s; (3) Argo database, 1835–1918; (4) Golden Fleece database, 1830s–1910s; (5) Argonauts database, 1793–1920; (6) Medea database, 1889–1930. The names of the databases derive from the ancient Greek myth of the Black Sea, Jason and the Golden Fleece, where the main hero Jason sailed on his ship the Argo in the Black Sea 18

The research project ‘The Black Sea and Its Port Cities, 1774–1914. Development, Convergence and Linkages with the Global Economy’, Appendix 2.8.

Navigating Greek Historiography

23

with his Argonauts, in search of the Golden Fleece; during his trip he married a woman called Medea, who left her home town to follow him. The ‘Black Sea Historical Statistics’ comprises two sets of statistical series on shipping and trade for the Black Sea port cities under examination (see Chapter 6 in this volume by Alexandra Papadopoulou and Socrates Petmezas). More specifically: (a) the first series contains statistics series related to shipping: the arrivals and departures at each port city, the total number of ships, tonnage, flag, type of ship and crew numbers; (b) the second series contains trade statistics  – that is, exports and imports in value and grain exports in value and quantity according to the type of grain, for every port city, country and export destination. The statistical data derive from primary sources from Russian, Romanian and Bulgarian archives (i.e. statistical archival sources), as well as from British and French consular archives. These statistics can be accessed at the project’s website http://blacksea.gr/en/cities under the entry ‘Statistics in the Black Sea Port Cities – Interactive History, 1780s–1910s’, and will also be published in an online volume.19 The Jason database contains data on a population of 2,700 merchants, shipowners and bankers who were active in the Black Sea port cities from the beginning of the nineteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth century. Every entry has the surname, name, date of birth, nationality, profession and classification of the merchant according to the Russian guild system, the annual value of the foreign trade that was engaged with, the ships they owned and the archive where the information came from. The Argo database includes 2,200 ships registered in the Black Sea port cities. Every entry has the name of the ship, the type, tonnage, flag, place of build, date of build, the captain, the owner, place of registration and the archive where the information comes from. The Argo and Jason databases are interrelated and published in http:// blacksea.gr/en. The Golden Fleece database contains 24,000 arrivals and departures from the Black Sea ports, from the beginning of the nineteenth to the beginning of the twentieth century. Every entry includes the date of arrival/ departure, the name of the ship, the flag, the tonnage, type, port of origin, type and quantity of cargo, the merchant to whom it is addressed and the archival source from which the information is extracted; publication of this database is forthcoming. The Argonauts database has focused on demographics. 19

Alexandra Papadopoulou, ‘The Black Sea Historical Statistics, 1812–1914: A Short Introduction’, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 451–463. Socrates Petmezas and Alexandra Papadopoulou (eds), The Development of 24 Black Sea Port Cities: A Statistical Approach (Black Sea Working Papers, www.blacksea.gr), volume VIII (forthcoming).

24

Harlaftis

It contains 22,106 entries of baptisms, marriages and deaths in the Greek community of Odessa, as registered in the church books of the Agia Trias Greek Church of Odessa from the beginning of the nineteenth to the beginning of the twentieth century. Every entry contains the date of the event, the surname, name, nationality, age, gender, name of parents, their profession and nationality, the name of the godparents/best men or women, their nationality and the cause of death; publication of this database is forthcoming. The Medea database contains 6,060 immigrants from Odessa to Buenos Aires and derives its sources from the Centro de Estudios Migratorios Latinoamericanos (CEMLA), Buenos Aires, Argentina. Every entry contains the name and surname of the immigrant, the nationality, place of origin, age and gender, and the ship on which he/she sailed; publication of this database is forthcoming. SeaLiT–FastCat, is under construction (Appendix 2.9).20 SeaLiT addresses the transition from sail to steam in the Mediterranean and its repercussions for maritime labour. Ship logbooks, shipping business papers, account ledgers, maritime community notarial archives, seamen registries from state seafaring labour archives and population censuses are some of the types of sources under study; they are collected from a number of Mediterranean and Black Sea countries and are written in five different languages. SeaLiT–FastCat combines both quantitative and qualitative approaches. It aims to construct systematic data series for seamen, which enable to address a number of crucial questions: seamen wages, manning ratios, old and new types of maritime professions, trade routes and duration of voyages. Qualitatively, an array of sources such as notarial archives, official and private correspondence, newspapers or memoirs complement our understanding of the contemporary views, mentalities and behavioural patterns with regard to shipping and labour under the pressure of technological innovation.21 3

Greek Shipping, the State and the Economy

All the above research formed the basis for answering some of the questions posed earlier. The first set of findings dealt with the development of Greek 20

21

The project ‘Seafaring Lives in Transition, Mediterranean Maritime Labour and Shipping, 1850s–1920s’ (SeaLiT), Centre of Maritime History of the Institute for Mediterranean Studies, of the Foundation of Research and Technology Hellas, is an international research project funded by the ERC Starting Grant 2016, with Apostolos Delis as Principal Investigator. Apostolos Delis, ‘Seafaring Lives at the Crossroads of Mediterranean Maritime History’, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 464–478.

Navigating Greek Historiography

25

shipping and its impact on the economy and the state of Greece. Greek shipping has had an ascending performance since the formation of the Greek state in 1830 to the present day, as databases Pontoporeia I and Pontoporeia II revealed (Table 2.1). Greek-owned shipping since 1970 has remained in a world-leading position. According to the Review of Maritime Transport, in 2018 Greece continued to be the largest ship-owning country, accounting for more than 17.3% of the world total.22 It is quite remarkable how a small European country owns a larger fleet than the world’s leading economies, such as the United States, Germany, Japan or China. Over the last three decades, post-World War II Greek shipping has been studied using the tools of economic theory, economic and maritime history, business history and business management, maritime and port economics, financial management, policy of human resources management within the framework of the national and international economies.23 Shipping proved to have a highly important role in the economic development of the country during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In 1847 Casimir Leconte, the French entrepreneur, banker and shipowner, wrote that ‘Greece should concentrate its efforts on the development of agriculture and shipping, its true sources of prosperity’.24 Seventy years later, in 1919 Emmanuel Tsouderos, Greek politician, economist and banker, observed that ‘Greece should remain 22

23

24

Review of Maritime Transport (New York and Geneva: UNCTAD, UN, 2018), 35. Greece was followed by Japan, China, Germany and Singapore. Together, the top five ship-owning countries control more than half of the world tonnage (dwt). Five of the top ten ship-owning countries are from Asia, four are European and one (the United States) is from the Americas. Helen Thanopoulou, Ελληνική και Διεθνής Ναυτιλία [Greek and International Shipping] (Athens: Papazisis, 1994); Gelina Harlaftis, Greek Shipowners and Greece 1945–1975 (London: Athlone Press, 1993); Gelina Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping (London: Routledge, 1993); Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Organizational and Managerial Patterns of Greekowned Shipping Companies, 1969–1990’ (Piraeus: University of Piraeus, 1997); Ioannis Theotokas, Maria B. Lekakou, Athanasios Pallis, Theodoros Syriopoulos and Ioannis Tsamourgelis, Ελληνική ναυτιλία, απασχόληση και ανταγωνιστικότητα. Στρατηγικές διοίκησης ανθρώπινου δυναμικού [Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness: Strategies for Human Resource Management] (Athens: Gutenberg, 2008); Ioannis Theotokas and Gelina Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping: Greek Family Firms in International Business (London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2009); Costas Grammenos (ed.), The Handbook of Maritime Economics and Business (London: Lloyd’s of London Press, 2002); Athanassios Pallis (ed.), Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm (Oxford: Elsevier, 2007); Gelina Harlaftis, Helen Thanopoulou and Ioannis Theotokas, Το Παρόν και το Μέλλον της Ελληνικής Ναυτιλίας [The Present and the Future of Greek Shipping], Research Study no. 10, Office of Economic Studies (Athens: Academy of Athens, 2009). Casimir Leconte, Étude économique de la Grèce, de sa position actuelle, de son avenir, suivie de documents sur le commerce de l’Orient, sur l’Égypte (Paris: n.p., 1847), 318.

26

Harlaftis

an agricultural and maritime nation’.25 Eighty years later, in 2000, the Governor of the Bank of Greece in his annual report mentioned that ‘maritime transport will continue to be a main source of income for the Greek economy’.26 Moreover, as shipping activity produced services outside the Greek borders, manifested on the international level, it was one of the factors that contributed to the convergence of the income and the economic development of Greece with the rest of the European economies. One cannot overlook the dynamics of modernisation. By bringing the Greek economy into contact with international markets and market practices, shipping was therefore a factor in the modernisation of the Greek state, advancing institutions that supported entrepreneurship and capital formation. As shipping takes place beyond the boundaries of the Greek state, the impact of shipping activities on the development of the Greek economy is through the transfer of shipping earnings to Greece from abroad. The most visible transfer of shipping earnings is through shipping foreign exchange, which includes seamen’s and shipowners’ remittances, and has been very important for the economy and the country’s balance of payments. The least visible impact of shipping activities on the country has been the shipowners’ investments in the Greek economy, other than shipping investments.27 For the nineteenth century, new research, that formed the database Ifestion, has indicated the importance of the Greek merchant fleet during the Greek Revolution in the 1820s (Table 2.1). After the formation of the Greek state, the estimates of shipping earnings have proved the contribution made by this sector to the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in comparison to the country’s leading export product (currants) and the total exports and imports of the economy.28 During the first fifty years of the existence of the Greek state (1830–80), shipping income was very high – an average of 30% of the whole Greek GDP. In some years it skyrocketed; for example, in 1847 it reached 70% of the GDP. For comparison, it might be useful to note that cotton textiles, a benchmark industry in Britain, peaked at 10% of national income, while in 25 26 27 28

Emmanuel J. Tsouderos, Le Relèvement Économique de la Grèce (Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1919), 222–3. Βλέπε τις Eτήσιες Eκθέσεις των Διοικητών της Τραπέζης της Ελλάδος 1962–2000 [Reports of the Governor of the Bank of Greece for the years 1962–2000] (Athens: Bank of Greece, 2001), 190. Harlaftis, Greek Shipowners and Greece, 61. Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Shipping’ in Kostas Kostis and Socrates Petmezas (eds), The Development of the Greek Economy in the 19th Century (Athens: Alexandria, 2006). Katerina Galani and Gelina Harlaftis (eds.), Greek Shipping during the War of Independence: Naval and Merchant Ships 1821-1831 (Iraklio: University of Crete Publications, 2021); Gelina Harlaftis and George Kostelenos, ‘International Shipping and National Economic Growth: Shipping Earnings and the Greek Economy in the Nineteenth Century’, The Economic History Review 65/4 (2012), 1403–27.

Navigating Greek Historiography

27

economies that have successfully entered modern economic growth, the total for manufacturing seldom exceeds about one third of the national income.29 Another important direct effect of shipping income involves the balance of payments.30 Shipping income appears to account for the most significant part of the country’s invisible earnings during most of the nineteenth century. Up to the Balkan Wars (1912–13), it covered an average of more than 70% of the balance of the country’s payments deficit.31 During the interwar period, it covered about 28% of the Greek deficit, and for the whole period from the end of World War II to the beginning of the 21st century, between 20 and 30%.32 In addition to the direct impact on the economy brought about by the income (profits and wages) generated, shipping triggered a cluster of related activities, such as banking, shipbroking, insurance and ancillary services, along with shipbuilding and ship repairing. During the nineteenth century, shipping triggered significant production of sailing ships in the main Greek maritime centres, particularly in the principal shipbuilding centre of the Eastern Mediterranean, Syros.33 Subsequently, in the era of steamships, the main change observed was the demise of the production of sailing ships by shipbuilders. On the other hand, partially offsetting the effects of this demise, steamship repair yards and engineering workshops were established in Syros and Piraeus, along with all ancillary services. Piraeus, the new economic centre of the country at the end of the century, also became the maritime centre for steamships, as well as developing as an industrial centre. It has remained so to the present day. It has been calculated that in the year 2000, the total number of people employed in deep-sea-going shipping or ancillary to shipping businesses was 194,000, representing 5% of total employment in Greece.34 During the twentieth century, shipowners developed as the country’s leading capitalists, and it was the wish of all Greek governments to attract their investments in the country.35 Although investments in industry and banking 29 30 31 32 33

34 35

Harlaftis and Kostelenos, ‘International Shipping’. Harlaftis, Greek Shipowners and Greece, 76–77; Harlaftis, Thanopoulou and Theotokas, The Present and the Future of Greek Shipping, 114. Harlaftis and Kostelenos, ‘International Shipping’. Harlaftis, Thanopoulou and Theotokas, The Present and the Future of Greek Shipping, Tables 6.4, 6.7, 6.8. It is only very recent research that gives us a detailed and in-depth analysis of the shipbuilding industry in Greece. See Apostolos Delis, Mediterranean Wooden Shipbuilding: Economy, Technology and Institutions in Syros in the Nineteenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 2015). Harlaftis, Thanopoulou and Theotokas, The Present and the Future of Greek Shipping, 137. Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Εφοπλιστές και κρατικός παρεμβατισμός’ [Shipowners and State Intervention], Istorika 6/10 (June 1989), 105–26; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Οι Έλληνες εφοπλιστές και ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής’ [Greek Shipowners and Constantine Karamanlis] in Constantinos

28

Harlaftis

had taken place during the first half of the twentieth century, it was during the first period of prime minister Konstantinos Karamanlis’s leadership (1955–8) that large-scale investments in the Greek economy started being made by Greece’s largest capitalists. Greek shipowners proceeded to invest extensively in the secondary and tertiary sectors of the Greek economy.36 More particularly, from the 1950s to the mid-1970s, Greek shipowners controlled the second largest group of commercial banks in Greece, accounting for 30 to 35% of the total deposits in the economy; they owned or participated in industrial firms that accounted for 19 to 29% of the total fixed assets of manufacturing; they owned or participated in investments that formed 17% of the insurance market; they were owners of a significant proportion of Greek real estate, and participated extensively in construction throughout the country.37 Furthermore, in the last decades, shipowners have invested in another particularly important sector, the mass media, not to mention the stakes they have in the most popular Greek soccer teams.38 4

Maritime Business History

The second set of findings dealt with the spectacular development of Greek shipping companies in the twentieth century. Greek family shipping firms developed a common business culture and understanding of international sea transport. The research revealed who the Greek shipowners were, and why they were so important in influencing global shipping. They all started from small island maritime communities as the databases Amphitrite, Pontoporeia I and Pontoporeia II revealed (Table 2.1). Greek families from the islands and port towns of the Ionian and Aegean seas have been involved since at least the eighteenth century in the longhaul Mediterranean trade, becoming the main local carriers between the Mediterranean and Black Sea and Northern Europe in the nineteenth century.39

36

37 38 39

Svolopoulos, Konstantina Botsiou and Evanthis Hatzivassiliou (eds), Ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής στον εικοστό αιώνα [Constantinos Karamanlis in the Twentieth Century], Proceedings of the International Academic Conference, Zappeion, 5–9 June 2007, vol. 3 (Athens: Foundation ‘Constantinos Karamanlis’, 2008), 92–112. About case studies of Greek ship-owning groups, see Gelina Harlaftis and Jésus M. Valdaliso, ‘Business Groups and Entrepreneurial Families in Southern Europe: Comparing Greek and Spanish Shipowners in the 19th and 20th Centuries’ in Tenold and Valdaliso (eds), World’s Key Industry, 235–62. Harlaftis, Greek Shipowners and Greece, 67. Theotokas and Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping, Chapter 5. Gelina Harlaftis, ‘International Business of Southeastern Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean, 18th Century: Sources, Methods and Interpretive Issues’ in Dove va la

Navigating Greek Historiography

29

In the twentieth century they expanded into global activities, with most Greek shipping families carrying a tradition of four, five, six generations of know-how of maritime business administration. Enriched by new entrants, new shipping families emerged from the shipping business itself, reproducing and expanding the international Greek shipping business.40 Greek business is an integral part of Europe’s maritime tradition and is still one of the continent’s success stories in the shipping sector. The development of the Greek shipping firm followed that of the European shipping firm. Greek shipping firms were embedded in Mediterranean/Southern European maritime entrepreneurship, and reinvented themselves between the eighteenth and the twenty-first centuries.41 Until the twentieth century, Europe’s shipping businesses thrived in specific maritime regions that shared common characteristics, and maritime practices spread mostly in small maritime communities to small, medium and large size ports from the Baltic and Atlantic to the Mediterranean and Black Sea. The North of Europe led the way until the 1970s, when the South surpassed the North (for once) in shipping. The most dynamic, and eventually the most important, group of European shipping firms in the second half of the twentieth century were Greek, and that is still the case in the first half of the twenty-first century. European shipping enterprises distinguish between the liner and tramp shipping sectors and followed five stages of development from the beginning of the nineteenth to the end of the twentieth century: (1) up to the 1820s; (2) from 1830s to 1870s; (3) from 1880s to 1930s; (4) 1940s to 1970s; and (5) after the 1980s. This periodisation covers the transition and adjustment of shipping companies from sailing ships to steamships and on to diesel and container ships, along with the development of shipping agencies and ship management companies.42 Greeks developed in the tramp shipping sector. A good example

40 41

42

storia economica? Metodi e prospettive. Secc. XIII–XVIII [Where is Economic History Going? Methods and Prospects from the 13th to the 18th Centuries], Atti della ‘Quarantaduesima Settimana di Studi’, 18–22 April 2010, edited by Francesco Ammannati (Florence: Firenze University Press, 2011). Theotokas and Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping. Gelina Harlaftis, Creating Global Shipping: Aristotle Onassis, the Vagliano Brothers and the Business of Shipping, c.1820–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019); Gelina Harlaftis, ‘The Onassis Global Shipping Business: 1920s–1950s’, Business History Review 88/2 (Summer 2014), 241–71; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘From Diaspora Traders to Shipping Tycoons: The Vagliano Bros.’, Business History Review 81/2 (Summer 2007), 237–68; Gelina Harlaftis and John Theotokas, ‘European Family Firms in International Business: British and Greek Tramp-Shipping Firms’, Business History 46 (April 2004), 219–55. Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Shipping’ in Teresa da Silva Lopes, Christina Lubinski and Heidi Tworek (eds), The Routledge Companion to the Makers of Global Business (Abingdon, Oxon/New York: Routledge, 2019).

30

Harlaftis

of the growth from the first to the third stage can be given by the Vagliano Bros, who made the transition from sailing shipping firm to international trading firm (second stage) and then led the way to the formation of a ship management firm (third stage). In the twentieth century, the main revolution in the carriage of goods at sea at the tramp shipping sector was the oil transportation and ship gigantism that took off after the end of World War II. Greek shipowners, led by Onassis, who had foreseen this development since the 1930s, invested in oil tankers and represent the world’s largest group of tanker owners to the present day. Ultimately, Greeks, by functioning as conduits for the integration of the economies of the Eastern Mediterranean and Black Sea regions in the international economy of the nineteenth century, expanded in the twentieth century to invest in all oceans, contributing to the globalisation of the world economies.43 5

Maritime Entrepreneurial Networks: Linking the ‘Inside’ with the ‘Outside’

The third set of findings dealt with the maritime entrepreneurial networks of Greek trading and shipping companies, examining the empire(s) and states they served and linked. The role of entrepreneurial networks has been associated with diaspora merchant communities based in Europe’s main port cities since at least the eighteenth century, a subject that has attracted scholarly attention in Greek historiography. It was only through shipping, however, that the true essence of the interdependence and linkages of the expansive entrepreneurial network of the Greeks was revealed. An important feature of shipping is that it manifested on the international markets and was not restricted within the borders of the Greek state. Shipping brought the peripheral economy closer to the ‘centre’. As only a part of the Greek population resided in the small Greek kingdom, from its foundation the country became a centre for coordination of activities that were spread over a much wider geographical area. The shipping business was the liaison of Greeks ‘outside’ the small Greek kingdom with those ‘inside’. Thus throughout the nineteenth century, Eastern Mediterranean and Black Sea commerce was organised largely by a Greek entrepreneurial network in trade and shipping dispersed among the main Mediterranean and Black Sea ports, as the database 43

Harlaftis, Creating Global Shipping; Gelina Harlaftis and David Starkey (eds), Global Markets: The Internationalization of Sea Transport Industries since 1850s, Research in Maritime History, no. 12 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 1998).

Navigating Greek Historiography

31

Poseidon revealed.44 The Greek entrepreneurial network in Mediterranean sea trade began to take shape in the last third of the eighteenth century and culminated in the last third of the nineteenth. This transnational maritime and trading circuit was founded on two pillars: diaspora shipping and trading businesses established in the port cities of the Black Sea and Western Europe and domestic shipping companies based in the Ionian and Aegean seas.45 The Greek entrepreneurial diaspora played a critical role in the construction and the competitive operation of the transnational Greek network, which really served European colonial expansion to the east and contributed to the growth of long-distance sea trade.46 The Greeks of Azov, Greek Merchant Banking: London, Constantinople and Vagliano Accounts databases along with those of the Black Sea (Table 2.1) provided ample evidence of the large trading families originating from the Greek islands that were established in Constantinople, London, Marseille and the southern Russian port cities.47 44 45

46

47

Gelina Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping: The Making of an International Tramp Fleet, 1830 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 1996). Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Mapping the Greek Maritime Diaspora from the Early 18th to the late 20th Century’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis and Ioanna Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Five Centuries of History (Oxford: Berg Publications, 2005), 147–69. Forty islands and ports in the Ionian and the Aegean Sea comprised parts of a ‘dispersed maritime city’ that developed the most important fleet in the Eastern Mediterranean from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. Greek historian Spyros Asdrachas coined the phrase ‘dispersed maritime city’ to stress the unity of the islands of the Greek seas; see Vasilis Spyroeras, Anna Avramea and Spyros Asdrahas, Maps and Map-makers of the Aegean (Athens: Olkos, 1985), 235–48. Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Το εμποροναυτιλιακό δίκτυο των Ελλήνων της Διασποράς και η ανάπτυξη της ελληνικής ναυτιλίας τον 19ο αιώνα: 1830–1860’ [The Commercial and Maritime Network of the Diaspora Greeks and the Development of Greek Shipping in the 19th Century: 1830– 1860], Μνήμων [Mnemon] 15 (1993), 69–127; Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping, Chapters 2 and 3; Harlaftis, ‘From Diaspora Traders to Shipping Tycoons’, 237–68. Harlaftis, Creating Global Shipping; Katerina Galani, ‘The Galata Bankers and the International Banking of the Greek Business Group in the 19th Century’ in Edhem Eldem and Sophia Laiou (eds), Istanbul and the Black Sea Coast: Trade and Shipping (1770–1820) (Istanbul: Isis, 2018); Evrydiki Sifneos, Imperial Odessa: Peoples, Spaces, Identities (Leiden: Brill, 2017); Evrydiki Sifneos and Gelina Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής, 18ος-αρχές 20ού αιώνα. Νέες προσεγγίσεις στην ιστορία των Ελλήνων της νότιας Ρωσίας [Greeks in the Azov, 18th – Beginning of 20th Century: New Approaches in the History of the Greeks in South Russia], National Research Foundation, Institute of Historical Research (Athens, 2015); ‘Greek Merchant Bankers in the City of London: The First Settlement (Early 19th Century)’ in Anglo-Greek Relations: Aspects of Their Recent Histories, edited by the Hellenic Parliament Foundation and the British Embassy in Athens (Athens, 2014); Evrydiki Sifneos and Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Entrepreneurship at the Russian Frontier of International Trade: The Greek Merchant Community/Paroikia of Taganrog in the Sea of Azov, 1780s–1830s’ in Zakharov, Harlaftis and Katsiardi-Hering, Merchant ‘Colonies’ in the Early Modern Period.

32

Harlaftis

The large international trading houses of the diaspora Greeks in the course of the nineteenth century essentially created a ‘production system’ with multiple hubs abroad and in the Ionian and the Aegean. They closely cooperated with small, medium and large shipping companies located in the Greek islands, in a loosely organised network. This ‘production system’, based on trust and close communication, had a triple dimension: local, national/regional and international.48 The Greek entrepreneurial network of the nineteenth century consisted of several hundred shipping companies (which owned 2,500 sea­going Greek sailboats in the mid-1870s) located mainly in the Ionian and Aegean Islands and some hundreds of Greek merchants in the diaspora, located in the main ports and financial centres of Europe and the Black Sea. It mainly relied on grain transport from the Black Sea ports to the ports of the Western Mediterranean and Northern Europe, as well as on the transport of coal on the way back from the Northern European ports to the Mediterranean. A significant number of these companies in the twentieth century created the nucleus of major twentieth-century Greek shipowners. To some extent, the international shipowners of the post-World War II era played the same role as the diaspora merchants of the nineteenth century.49 6

Maritime Communities

The fourth group of findings dealt with the islands of the Ionian and Aegean seas that developed as vibrant maritime communities engaged in long-haul Mediterranean and Black Sea trade. Recent research first identified the maritime communities that engaged in shipping and attempted to probe why islands were so important to the Greek shipping firms up until the end of the twentieth century. Some of the main issues addressed were the shipping families and the developmental patterns in response to political, economic and technological change. Previous research and studies, as presented in the previous sections, had overlooked the localities that produced Greek shipping: the maritime communities. The Greek islands that nourished the Greek maritime tradition, vibrant to the present day, remained for me a long-term enigma that needed to be solved. When I started to research in the 1980s, I realised that Greek shipowners raised in London or New York, who spent their lives in Paris, Switzerland or elsewhere, kept homes in their family’s island of origin and would return 48 49

Harlaftis, ‘From Diaspora Traders’. Harlaftis, Greek Shipowners and Greece, 9–10.

Navigating Greek Historiography

33

to ‘marry and to bury’. Why did they keep the imagined island community of their grandfathers’ and great-grandfathers’ origins alive? The puzzle of the importance of the local that retained a vivid connection with the global had to be researched. A maritime community includes all those who earn their living from the sea, shipping, shipping-related industries, fishing, other sea-based or shore-based industries and maritime tourism.50 Fifteen years ago, I defined as a maritime community – in Greek, a nautotopos – an island or coastal town that for at least thirty years during the nineteenth century had a fleet of a minimum of ten deep-sea-going vessels of over sixty tons.51 Following this definition, the databases Pontoporeia and Amphitrite helped us to identify that Ionian seas were maritime communities with deep-sea-going vessels. Furthermore, in the quest for, and study of, the maritime communities, I divided them into four maritime regions that shared common characteristics: Ionian Sea, Western Aegean, Central Aegean and Eastern Aegean. It is important to note at this point that the above maritime communities were not only the cradles of international shipping companies but also of Greek diaspora merchants dispersed in the main European port cities.52 The first maritime communities to develop international shipping since the early modern period were the Ionian Islands. The first research into the maritime history of the Ionian Islands and particularly of Corfu in the late fifteenth to the early sixteenth centuries was carried out in the early 2000s by Gerassimos Pagratis. Based on the data of some 20,000 notarial acts of the Greek General State Archive in Corfu, Pagratis has been able to follow the evolution of know-how in international trade, revealing the structures, strategies and business activities of Venetian Greeks in shipping over five centuries ago. He focuses on Corfu, the island of the northern Ionian Sea that balanced between Byzantine heritage and the effects of Latin rule. Venice’s strict protectionist policy did not prevent Venetian subjects from constructing, starting in the late fifteenth century, a thriving commercial fleet operating within the boundaries set by the Serenissima on local, regional and pan-European levels along the highly competitive Venetian routes that covered much of the Mediterranean. His studies examine the organisation and operation of the 50 51 52

Gelina Harlaftis ‘What is Maritime History?’ Forum, International Journal of Maritime History vol. 32(2) 2020, 383–402. Gelina Harlaftis, Helen Beneki and Manos Haritatos, Ploto, Greek Shipowners from the Late 18th Century to the Eve of WWII (Athens: ELIA/Niarchos Foundation, 2003 [in Greek and English]). Harlaftis, Beneki and Haritatos, Ploto, Greek Shipowners; see also Harlaftis and Papakon­ stantinou, Greek Shipping.

34

Harlaftis

oldest known merchant fleet to date, formed by Greeks in the early modern times, and follow its path for the next four centuries, from the Venetian times to the formation of the Septinsular Republic.53 The project that studied the nineteenth-century Greek maritime communities produced the databases Margitsa, Dievo and Odysseas (see Table 2.1) and publications on specific case studies, namely Syros, Spetses and the Ionian Islands, respectively. Research concentrated on the maritime region, the maritime community, island business groups, shipping companies and shipbuilding. The studies probed maritime entrepreneurship in the small yet international maritime communities at the heyday of sailing ships, and highlighted all aspects of the economic activities related to shipping. Maritime communities such as Spetses, Cephalonia or Ithaca and maritime centres such as Syros had shipowners, vessels and seamen, important shipbuilding activities, shipbuilders, financiers, insurance companies, ship suppliers, ship charterers, classification societies, port infrastructures; the impact on the entire local community was evident in the development and actual structures of the towns. In a meticulous study, Apostolos Delis brought out the importance of the Aegean island of Syros as the main maritime centre of Greece, the main shipbuilding centre of the Eastern Mediterranean and one of the most important in the whole of the Mediterranean.54 Alexandra Papadopoulou, in an in-depth analysis of the maritime community of the Aegean island of Spetses, discussed the inner socio-economic structure and distinguished phases in the evolution of 53

54

Gerassimos Pagratis, Βενετικό Κράτος της Θάλασσας. Οι ναυτιλιακές επιχειρήσεις της Κέρκυρας, 1496–1538 [Society and Economy in the Venetian ‘Stato da Mar’: The Shipping Enterprises of Corfu (1496–1538)] (Athens: Pedio, 2013); Pagratis, ‘The Byzantine and Greek Maritime Marines (Maritime Enterprises) in the Medieval Mediterranean’ in Michel Balard (ed.), Histoire Maritime: Le Moyen-Age, Oceanides (Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer, 2017), 424–35; Pagratis ‘Shipping Enterprise in the Eighteenth Century: The Case of the Greek Subjects of Venice’, Mediterranean Historical Review 25/1 (2010), 67–81; Pagratis, ‘The Ottoman Empire and Ionian Maritime Enterprises in the Late 18th and Early 19th Centuries’ in Eldem and Laiou, Istanbul and the Black Sea Coast, 27–33. Apostolos Delis, ‘Ερμούπολη (Σύρος): το ναυπηγικό κέντρο της ιστιοφόρου ναυτιλίας, 1830– 1880’ [Hermoupolis (Syros): The Shipbuilding Centre of the Sailing Merchant Marine, 1830–1880] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2010). The study reworked came out as Delis, Mediterranean Wooden Shipbuilding. Delis has proceeded in further publications; see Apostolos Delis, ‘Parallel Growth to Great Divergence: Greek Shipbuilding from the Late Eighteenth to Early Twentieth Centuries’, History of Technology 33, Special Issue, Stathis Arapostathis and Aristotle Tympas (eds), History of Technology in Greece from the Nineteenth to the Twenty-first Century (London: Bloomsbury, 2017), 21–46; Apostolos Delis, ‘Modern Greece’s First Industry? The Shipbuilding Centre of Sailing Merchant Marine of Syros, 1830–70’, European Review of Economic History 19/3 (2015), 255–74; Apostolos Delis, ‘A Mediterranean Insular Port City in Transition: Economic Transformations, Space Antagonisms and Landscape Metamorphosis in Nineteenth-century Hermoupolis on the Island of Syros’, Urban History 42/2 (May 2015), 225–45.

Navigating Greek Historiography

35

the maritime family businesses of one of the most traditional maritime communities of Greece and its international linkages.55 Panayotis Kapetanakis was able to outline the geographic expansion of the activities of the Ionian Islands shipping fleet during the time of the British protection and bring out glimpses of the Cephalonian maritime entrepreneurship.56 The competitiveness of the fleet of the Greeks in the international environment of the Mediterranean economy during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was found to rely on five factors.57 The first one concerned the formation and the dynamic evolution of the institution of the shipping company. Every maritime community included shipping families that developed common business practices and worked as family business groups.58 The second factor that contributed to their competitiveness was the strategy they followed. There was a common entrepreneurial strategy that had to do with (a) the adoption of various flags, (b) the adaptation to different ship types and (c) the geographical expansion of their activities. The third factor that led to the increased competitiveness of the Greek-owned fleet was specialisation and verticalisation of production. The family shipping business groups that Greeks formed in the maritime centres of a certain maritime region functioned as ‘clusters’. ‘Clusters’ are groups of firms in geographical proximity with interlinked businesses and appropriate institutions in a particular economic sector, linked with common characteristics and complementarities.59 The geographically concentrated businesses, with specialised workforce for 55

56

57 58 59

Alexandra Papadopoulou, ‘Ναυτιλιακές επιχειρήσεις, διεθνή δίκτυα και θεσμοί στη σπετσιώτικη εμπορική ναυτιλία, 1830–1870. Οργάνωση, διοίκηση και στρατηγική’ [Maritime Businesses, International Networks and Institutions in the Merchant Shipping of the Island of Spetses: Organisation, Administration and Strategy] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2010). The study reworked is forthcoming by Crete University Press. Panayotis Kapetanakis, ‘Ο ποντοπόρος εμπορικός στόλος των Επτανήσων κατά την διάρκεια της βρετανικής κατοχής και προστασίας και η κεφαλληνιακή υπεροχή (1809/1815–1864)’ [The Deep-Sea Going Merchant Fleet of the Seven Islands of the Ionian Sea During the Time of British Conquest and Protection and the Cephalonian Prominence (1809/1815– 1864)] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2010). The study reworked has been published as Kapetanakis, Ναυτιλία και Εμπόριο υπό Βρετανική Προστασία  – Ιόνιο Κράτος (1815–1864) [Shipping and Commerce under British Protection  – Ionian State (1815–1864)], National Hellenic Research Foundation, Athens, 2015; see also Kapetanakis, ‘The Ionian State in the “British” Nineteenth Century, 1814–1864: From Adriatic Isolation to Atlantic Integration’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/1 (June 2010), 163–84. Harlaftis, Creating Global Shipping; Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou, Greek Shipping. Papadopoulou, ‘Greek Maritime Centres’. Michael Porter, ‘Location, Competition and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy’, Economic Development Quarterly 14/1 (2000), 15–34; Michael Porter, ‘Locations, Clusters and Company Strategy’ in Gordon L. Clark, Maryann P. Feldman and Meric S. Gertler (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 253–74.

36

Harlaftis

the management, operation, running, supplying, building and repair of a ship, were some of the main competitive advantages of the maritime centres in each maritime region. Transmission and reproduction of entrepreneurial know-how was intensified by the spatial proximity of the clusters of shipping firms. This formed the prerequisite for the survival of the shipping firms, and the adaptability, availability, turnover and absorption of new information by the businesses.60 The fourth factor that contributed to the success of the shipping companies of the maritime communities in the northeastern Mediterranean was the highly specialised maritime labour. One of the most important competitive advantages of the Greek merchant fleet was a steady corpus of about 18,000 skilled seafarers: seamen, bosuns, carpenters, mates and masters, coupled with shipbuilders and ship-chandlers. This pool of human resources provided the basis for the entrepreneurship and function of the shipping businesses. All the above contributed to the fifth important factor of the competitiveness of the Greek merchant fleet – that is, the formation of entrepreneurial networks and the creation of a Greek system of production of sea trade and maritime services. The core of the entrepreneurial network of the Greeks, one of the pillars of its production system, were the above shipping companies of the maritime communities of the Ionian and Aegean seas. They provided competitive sea transport services. The other pillar were the powerful diaspora merchants. It was the members of the Ionian and Aegean communities that went on to establish themselves in the ports of the Black Sea and Western Europe and became powerful diaspora merchants, providing the cargoes from the production areas of the Black Sea and sending them to the consumption areas of Western Europe. Further research is currently underway on Mediterranean maritime com­ munities on a broader scale that studies the effects of technological change on seafaring populations in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea from the second half of the nineteenth century to the interwar period, a period during which maritime communities were transformed and reinvented. Its research has produced the database SeaLit-Fast Cat.61 Through the systematic documentation of maritime communities in Russian, Greek, Italian, French and Spanish archives, changes are explored in the maritime labour market, and insights are given into the evolving relations between shipowners, captains, crews and their local 60 61

Amy K. Glasmeier, ‘Economic Geography in Practice: Local Economic Development Policy’ in Clark, Feldman and Gertler, The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, 559–79. Research project ‘SeaLiT: Seafaring Lives in Transition’. See Appendix 2.9.

Navigating Greek Historiography

37

societies, life on board and ashore, as well as the development of new business strategies, trade routes and navigation patterns. The project offers a comparative perspective, investigating both collectivities and individuals, on board the ships and on shore, in a number of large and small ports from Barcelona all the way to Odessa in the Black Sea. 7

A History of the Sea

The fifth group of findings deals with how we approach the history of the sea. The long-term research of Greeks in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea brought out some new conceptual and analytical tools that can be applied elsewhere as well. But let me stress again the framework of the research on the history of the sea. The important issue in Maritime History is to study the sea as a dynamic agent, and not just as a setting or a geographical area. To use an economic, social, political, cultural, anthropological, technological, environmental or legal historical approach, or a combination of the above, there are five approaches that encompass all mankind’s activities with the sea dynamically and diachronically. I introduced elsewhere a reinvention of Broeze’s definition of Maritime History.62 It is of course what humans did on the sea (ships, navigation, seamen, sea trade, war, piracy); around the sea (maritime communities, islands, port cities, shipping business, shipping-related business, fishing and touristic businesses); in the sea (fishing, maritime resources, environment); because of the sea (maritime transport systems and entrepreneurial networks, maritime empires, international and national maritime institutions and policy); and about the sea (the maritime culture and heritage, the ideology, the myths and poems of a sea, the impact of the sea on the art). Through these five categories, one can follow continuity and change, see how mankind interacts with the sea and affect the path of history on land. Furthermore, a clear geographic dimension is introduced, putting Maritime History in the frame of a sea, an ocean, or a maritime region. We are used to dealing with land regions and not maritime regions. Maritime regions, however, develop their own integrated markets, as maritime communications play a very important role in their connectivity. Let us look briefly at the Mediterranean as an example. 62

See Gelina Harlaftis ‘What is Maritime History?’ Forum, International Journal of Maritime History vol. 32(2) 2020, 383–402. For the first definition of Maritime History that defined the field see Frank Broeze, ‘From the Periphery to the Mainstream: The Challenge of Australia’s Maritime History’, The Great Circle 11/1 (1989), 1–14.

38

Harlaftis

It was the seminal book by Horden and Purcell, The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History, that triggered a revival in the study of the Mediterranean and the connectivity of its maritime regions.63 Horden and Purcell developed a model for approaching Mediterranean history, and they started with two hypotheses based on the activities of people on the sea and around the sea, focusing on maritime regions. The first one is that there is no unity in the Mediterranean; the internal sea is extremely fragmented, it is a mosaic. The second one is the contradiction: there is unity in the Mediterranean. To approach both contradictory hypotheses, they form a model. The model shows that when viewed at a macro scale, small regions unite with each other. This unification that starts from small distances and small places strengthens the history of the Mediterranean – that is, of the people that live in the Mediterranean and not those that come to the Mediterranean. And they conclude that the Mediterranean draws its unity and coherence less from the connections of major sea routes of the city ports – the Braudelian view – and more from the connectivity of micro-regions.64 The rise of the Greek-owned fleet was not based on the trade of the big Ottoman port cities. It was the ships of the main Western European powers that traded in the big port cities. The local seafarers, the Greek-owned ships, were not loading in the big port cities of the empire like Constantinople, Smyrna, Alexandria or Salonica but in small, often uninhabited coastal places where goods were gathered. This indicates, however, that the unity of the Mediterranean lay in the connectivity of both the small places and the regional routes and their linkages to the main sea ports. The empirical data from the Greek paradigm leads us to the revelation of the mechanisms of connectivity, of sea transport systems that help us understand not only the rise of Greek shipping in the eighteenth century but also the dynamics of the sea trade of the Eastern Mediterranean. We approach the Mediterranean Sea as a unity that is formed from the co-articulation of micro-, meso- and macro-maritime regions (see map 1). To that end, we divide the Mediterranean into three macro-maritime regions: the Eastern Mediterranean or Levante (1), Central (2) and Western (3) Mediterranean. We divide the Western Mediterranean into two meso-maritime regions, Northwestern and Southwestern (3A and 3B), and the Eastern Mediterranean 63

64

The fascinating volume by Peregrine Horden and Nicholas Purcell, The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2000) mainly concerns ancient and medieval Mediterranean history, despite multiple references to the early modern and modern eras. Horden and Purcell, The Corrupting Sea, 90.

Navigating Greek Historiography

Map 2.1

39

Maritime Regions in the Mediterranean

into three meso-maritime regions: Northeastern (1A) and Southeastern (1B) Mediterranean and the Black Sea (1C). And each meso-maritime region is divided into micro-maritime regions. Our aim is to trace the mechanisms of integration, how micro-regions are linked. The mechanism is the sea transport system.65 The sea transport system is an entrepreneurial system within a geographical area that indicates the link of the hinterland with the foreland. In each region there are loading points and places that provide sea transport services through a division of labour, complementarity, circulation of information, efficiency and productivity. We consider that each maritime region consists of dynamic systems of flows of movements, and it is not just a static structure of places. In each maritime region certain characteristics are identified: 65

Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων ως μοχλός ενοποίησης των αγορών. Η μεθοδολογία’

[Greek Shipping as a Unification Factor of Markets: The Methodology] in Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou, Greek Shipping, 39–90. For the analysis of maritime transport systems in the Eastern Mediterranean in the eighteenth century, see Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Black Sea and Its Maritime Networks, 1770s–1820s: The Beginnings of Its European Integration’ in Fondazione Istituto Internazionale di Storia Economica ‘F. Datini’, Maritime Networks as a Factor in European Integration (Prato: Firenze University Press, 2019), 355–82. Gelina Harlaftis ‘Black Sea History: A Maritime, Economic and Social Approach’ in Gelina Harlaftis et al. (eds), Between Grain and Oil: The Integration of the Port Cities of the Eastern Coast of the Black Sea to the Global Economy, Late 18th–Early 20th Centuries (Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 3, www.blacksea.gr).

40

Harlaftis

1)

In every maritime region goods produced in the hinterland were directed to the coastal zone, producing a system linking land and sea transport. 2) In every maritime region particular loading places were formed. The central, medium and small loading places formed the coastal export zone, the area that linked the hinterland with the ‘foreland’. The ‘foreland’ was the ports where cargoes were directed. 3) In every maritime region places that developed fleets were formed, the maritime centres. Small, medium and large maritime centres formed a maritime zone that integrated local markets. 4) The loading places and the maritime centres formed the transport system of a maritime region: the inter-relation of the maritime zone of the maritime centres with the coastal export zone of the loading places. 5) The transport system of each maritime region was the forefront for the formation of a productive system that integrated the markets within a maritime region and with other maritime regions. A sea transport system thus consists of loading points and maritime centres where fleets are based. Its main characteristic is its connectivity within the maritime regions, where the sea routes of the foreland are connected with the land routes of the hinterland forming in this way a dense chain of intermodal transportation. Each maritime region is connected with the adjacent one, uniting in this way the sea transport of a micro-, meso- and macro-region with the ‘foreland’. Maritime sea transport systems lead to the economic integration of the area with the Western European markets. 8

Centre of Maritime History at the Institute for Mediterranean Studies-FORTH

An important development of the blooming of Maritime History in Greece is the formation in 2017 of the Centre of Maritime History at IMS-FORTH, Greece. There was a long-standing goal to organise a centre in the Mediterranean that would generate and promote research, seminars, lectures and conferences, educate PhD students, host young postdoctoral students and support publications. Skip Fischer, in his last publication in the International Journal of Maritime History in May 2017, wrote that he believed in the existence of ‘centres of excellence’ to promote the research and study of Maritime History, where ‘a critical mass of scholars interested in the same subject is especially conducive to fostering team research’. He stressed that ‘such centres can create an atmosphere that is conducive to team as opposed to individual research’ and he was an advocate of such centres because these were ‘places

Navigating Greek Historiography

41

where team skills can be taught’ and a new breed of maritime historians can be trained.66 This is exactly what we are trying to do in the new Centre of Maritime History in IMS-FORTH. Our goal is to set up a centre of excellence devoted to the research of Maritime History in the Mediterranean, where young scholars are trained in Maritime History, archival work, finding resources and planning research projects. An institution that is a meeting point, a place of research, education, communication and inspiration in Maritime History. One should also take into consideration that in Rethymno, Crete, there is the University of Crete, and IMS-FORTH collaborates with the University academics and students, forming a thriving academic community.67 The aim of the centre is to expand research on a broad range of topics within the field of Maritime History, related to the areas of the Mediterranean, the Black Sea and beyond, with global, interdisciplinary and comparative studies at its epicentre. At the moment the research group of the Centre of Maritime History in IMS-FORTH employs twenty-five full-time scholars  – researchers, postdocs, PhD students and graduate students – in the research projects that it runs presently.68 The Centre of Maritime History took off when Dr Apostolos Delis, researcher at IMS/FORTH and co-founder of the Centre of Maritime History, gained the prestigious European Research Council Starting Grant titled ‘Seafaring Lives in Transition: Mediterranean Maritime Labour and Shipping During Globalization, 1850s–1920s’, and this project has attracted a large team of postdocs, PhD and graduate students studying Maritime History.69 66 67 68

69

Lewis R. Fischer, ‘The Future Course of Maritime History’, International Journal of Maritime History 29/2 (May 2017), 355–64. See also Gelina Harlaftis ‘What is Maritime History?’ Forum, International Journal of Maritime History vol. 32(2) 2020, 383–402. See the website of the Institute for Mediterranean Studies, www.ims.forth.gr. Selectively, three of six ongoing projects at the Centre of Maritime History are: (1) the flagship project, ‘SeaLiT: Seafaring Lives in Transition, Mediterranean Maritime Labour and Shipping During Globalization, 1850s–1920s’, with Apostolos Delis as Principal Investigator, funded by an ERC Starting Grant that runs from 2017 to 2022; (2) the ‘Onassis Archive, 2nd part. Tradition and Innovation’ led by Gelina Harlaftis, with main postdoc Alexandra Papadopoulou, funded by the Onassis Foundation (duration of the project: 2022–24); (3) ‘History of the Black Sea, 18th–20th century’, led by Gelina Harlaftis and Anna Sydorenko; this ongoing project continues the work of the Black Sea Project (2012– 15). It still processes its archival material, statistical series and publications, and feeds its website with new information. See www.blacksea.gr ‘The Black Sea and Its Port Cities, 1774–1914. Development, Convergence and Linkages with the Global Economy’, a research project within the Entrepreneurial Research Programme THALIS of the Greek National Strategic Reference Framework. For more, see www.ims.forth.gr. More on the project in Apostolos Delis, ‘Seafaring Lives at the Crossroads of Mediterranean Maritime History’.

42

Harlaftis

The new Centre of Maritime History of IMS/FORTH is also connected with two publication series. The first one is Brill’s Studies in Maritime History, which already counts twelve handsome volumes.70 The other one is in Greek, a series in Maritime History with Crete University Press.71 The great prospect of the centre is the new generation of maritime historians, a group of more than ten PhD students.72 9

Whither Greek Maritime History?

It brings us great satisfaction to see the important group of maritime practitioners today. They all acknowledge the great strength of Maritime History; its ability to explore the local, expand beyond borders and understand the 70 See https://brill.com/view/serial/BSMH. 71 Τhe first book published in this series is Katerina Galani and Gelina Harlaftis (eds.), Greek Shipping during the War of Independence: Naval and Merchant Ships 1821-1831 (Iraklio: University of Crete Publications, 2021). 72 The following PhD students are currently carrying out research in Maritime History connected with research projects of the Centre of Maritime History of IMS-FORTH. On maritime communities and shipping businesses, Dimitra Kardakaris, ‘From Kasos and Syros to London and New York: The Business Group of the Shipowners of Kasos from the End of the 19th Century to the Mid-20th. The Evolution of the Greek Maritime Businesses from Local to Global’, Ionian University; Minas Antypas, ‘Society and Economy on Hydra, 1815–1850. Shipping, Trade and Bourgeoisie on the Verge of Transition from the Ottoman Past to the New Greek State’, University of Crete; Kalliopi Vasilaki, ‘The Maritime Communities in French Mediterranean: The Case of La Ciotat (1850–1920)’, University of Crete. On maritime business, Angelos Drougoutis, ‘The Shipowning Group of Chiot Shipowners. The Case of Stratis Andreades’, University of Crete. On port cities, Thanasis Nasiaras, ‘Thessaloniki in Transition. Economic and Social Evolution of a Port City from the Beginning of the 20th Century until the End of the Interwar Period’, Ionian University; Petros Kastrinakis, ‘An Ottoman Port in the 19th Century: The Case of Chania’, University of Crete; Thomas Kalesios, ‘The Port Workers of Piraeus: The Formation and Function of a Professional Sector, Trade Union, and Political Action, Daily Life’, University of Crete. On seafarers, Alkis Kapokakis, ‘Maritime Labour in Greece, 1850–1914’, University of Crete. On fishing, Nikos Alevizakis, ‘A History of Fishing in the Greek Seas (1900–1940)’, Ionian University. Furthermore, connected to the above group are, Nikos Megapanos, ‘The shipping of Messolonghi in the 18th century. A fleet on the borders’, University of Crete; Sophia Irakleidou, ‘The relation of the Dodecanese islands with the sea: fishing, shipping, immigration during the period of the Italian administration (1912-1947)’, University of Crete; Panayotis Raptis, ‘The Birth of a Maritime Centre: The Evolution of the Merchant Shipping of Cephalonia from its Integration to the Venetian State to the Treaty of Carlowitz (1500–1699)’, University of Athens. It is important to note that ph.D. students from other Mediterranean countries have benefited from CMH-IMS/FORTH research projects such as Dr Leonardo Schiavino from University of Genova who completed his thesis and Eduard Page, ph.D. student from University of Barcelona.

Navigating Greek Historiography

43

global. As Eric Hobsbawm has said, each generation needs to rewrite history. And this generation of Greek maritime historians will rewrite the Greek, Eastern Mediterranean, Mediterranean and Black Sea histories with a global perspective. There is a lot of work to be done. The island economies, so isolated and so cosmopolitan, need to be written and rewritten. The history of the ‘Levante’ needs to be rewritten – this time, not only from the perspective of the Western European powers but also from those of the Ottomans, Russians and Habsburgs, and connect these with Greek national historiography. The maritime communities and the development of their maritime culture should be further explored; the importance of the women left behind in these small societies is a neglected and fascinating subject. The ways communities were able to combat economic crisis and survive through dire straits also need to be studied. The formation of maritime business culture in the wealthy port cities on the coastal zones and the islands should be sought in private shipping business archives in order to study the ways they carried out their businesses and how they defended themselves from the risks of the sea. One should enter the houses and the churches of the islands and port cities to explore the wealth brought from the sea and to explore the connections between religion and the sea, paintings/art and the sea, literature and the sea. More studies on diaspora shipping and commercial enterprises need to be done. Commercial and shipping archives have to be constructed following the international routes of the Greek businessmen. The impact of these important capitalists on Greek economic, social and political life has not yet been written. The history of Greek maritime labour has only just started.73 The Eastern Mediterranean and Black Sea fisheries are also highly understudied. There is a mine of information in the archives of the Ottoman and Russian empires that needs to be explored, and there are more and more archives to be examined. The expansion to the West and East of the Eastern Mediterranean still needs to be analysed. The port cities are usually seen from the point of view of the hinterland and not the foreland. The unity and development of Eastern European and Eurasian land and sea routes are still not fully explored. There was a great expansion of Ottoman traders to the East, to India, to China, which young Greek researchers are slowly unravelling.74 Maritime connections between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea, the Atlantic, the Indian Ocean, East 73 74

Vassilis Skountis, ‘Ναυτική εργασία και ελληνικό κράτος. Τάσεις εκσυγχρονισμού στο μεσοπόλεμο’ [Seafaring Labour and the Greek State: Modernization Trends During the Interwar Period] (Unpublished PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2018). Andreas Lyberatos, Οικονομία, πολιτική και εθνική ιδεολογία η διαμόρφωση των εθνικών κομμάτων στη Φιλιππούπολη του 19ου αιώνα [Economy, Politics and National Ideology: The Formation of National Parties in Philipoupoli of 19th Century] (Herakleion: Crete University Press, 2009). Ioannis Carras, ‘Εμπόριο, Πολιτική και Αδελφότητα: Ρωμιοί στη Ρωσία 1700–1774’

44

Harlaftis

Asia, Australia and Africa are yet to be explored, whether for cargoes or for transport of people. And of course the history of tourism and the sea is another big chapter that has not really been opened yet. So, I do hope that in another thirty years, more than one scholar from this volume will have a lot to say on the developments of Greek Maritime History and how it became a paradigm of how to navigate history from the local to the global through the sea. 10

Appendix

2.1 Pontoporeia I and Pontoporeia II were the result of the Research Programme ‘Two Centuries of Greek Shipping Companies’, led by the Hellenic Historical and Literary Archive, carried out in the Hellenic Historical and Literary Archive (ELIA) with Gelina Harlaftis as project leader, 1998–2004, financed by the Niarchos Foundation. Pontoporeia II (still unpublished) was constructed in collaboration with Ioannis Theotokas. Pontoporeia I has been published in Gelina Harlaftis and Nikos Vlassopoulos, Ιστορικός νηογνώμονας, Ποντοπόρεια. Ποντοπόρα Ιστιοφόρα και Ατμόπλοια 1830–1939 [Pontoporeia, Historical Registry Book of Greek cargo sailing ships and steamships, 1830–1939] (ELIA/Niarchos Foundation, 2002 [in Greek]). Pontoporeia I is published online at www.marehist.gr Pontoporeia II is still unpublished. A team of about ten researchers combined data from twelve sources in the UK, France, Italy and Greece (from international registries like Bureau Veritas, Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, Lloyd Austriaco, the Greek Shipping Registry Archangelos, commercial newspapers like Semaphore de Marseille and registries of ships of the Greek Port Authorities). My first attempt to organise a research group to collect ship registries from the Greek port authorities took place between 1991 and 1996, where I put up a small research project, ‘Identification, Photography and Digitisation of Old Ship Registries in Greek Port Authorities’, financed by the Greek Shipowners’ Union (GSU) and the Hellenic Chamber of Shipping. It was the respected shipowner Giorgos Dracopoulos (who had also founded the Myconos Maritime Museum) who supported it in the GSU and the then PhD student, now Professor, Ioannis Theotokas who led a group of students to carry out this research during consecutive summers. 2.2 Amphitrite was the result of the Research Programme ‘Greek Maritime History 18th century’, Pythagoras I, Ionian University, 2004–6, with Gelina Harlaftis as project leader, Katerina Papakonstantinou as the main postdoctoral researcher, financed by Greek Ministry of Education/EU. The database Amphitrite was made from a team of twenty researchers that carried out combined research in twenty-five Archives in seventeen cities and towns: Istanbul, Venice, Trieste, Malta, Messina, Naples, [Trade, Politics and Brotherhood: The Greeks in Russia 1700–1774] (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Athens, 2011).

Navigating Greek Historiography

45

Livorno, Genoa, Marseille, London and Amsterdam, along with Athens, Thessaloniki, Iraklion, Corfu, Cephalonia and Hydra. On the sources of this project, see Katerina Papakonstantinou, ‘Archival Sources and Amphitrite: The Research’ in Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou, Greek Shipping, 91–126. For detailed account of the sources, see also Gelina Harlaftis and Sophia Laiou, ‘Ottoman State Policy in Mediterranean Trade and Shipping, c.1780–c.1820: The Rise of the Greek-Owned Ottoman Merchant Fleet’ in Mark Mazower (ed.), Networks of Power in Modern Greece (London: Hurst, 2008), 1–44. Amphitrite is published in www.marehist.gr. 2.3 Ifestion is the result of the Research Programme ‘Greek Shipping in the Age of Revolution: Naval and Merchant Fleet, 1821–1831’ funded by the Stavros Niarchos Foundation, 2016–19, Ionian University and Centre of Maritime History of IMS-FORTH led by Dr Katerina Galani and Gelina Harlaftis as academic advisor. Ifestion has been formed by archival evidence from state and commercial newspapers of the Ionian Islands, Constantinople and Odessa, the Sanitá of Livorno and Trieste, and from the Greek General State Archives. It is still under construction. For more details see Katerina Galani and Gelina Harlaftis (eds.), Greek Shipping during the War of Independence: Naval and Merchant Ships 1821-1831 (Iraklio: University of Crete Publications, 2021). 2.4 Poseidon was the result of a private research project of Gelina Harlaftis during 1990–5. This is the first database of voyages constructed for the writing of the book A History of Greek-owned Shipping and privately funded. It concerned arrivals of ships in the ports of Marseille from the commercial newspaper Semaphore de Marseille and London Customs Bills of Entry from 1830 to 1910, every ten years. The data for the arrival of ships in Marseille in the interim five-year period has been supplemented by Apostolos Delis in 2012–13, funded by the Black Sea project. Poseidon is still unpublished. 2.5 Margitsa, Dievo and Odysseas were the result of the Research Programme ‘Greek Maritime Centres in the 19th Century’, PENED, Ionian University, 2005–8, with Gelina Harlaftis as project leader, financed by the Greek Ministry of Development/EU, 2005– 8. The databases were formed by the then PhD students of the project, and they based their PhD theses on these (see footnotes 57–59). Apostolos Delis, working on Syros, created Margitsa; Alexandra Papadopoulou, working on Spetses, created Dievo; and Panayotis Kapetanakis, working on the Ionian I (slands, created Odysseas. All three databases are unpublished. 2.6 Greeks of Azov was the result of the research project ‘The Development of the Ports of the Azov and the Greeks in the 19th Century’, Ionian University and Hellenic National Foundation (EIE) 2007–10, with Gelina Harlaftis and Evrydiki Sifneos as project leaders, financed by the Kostopoulos Foundation, Alpha Bank and the Levendis Foundation. The database was constructed by lists of merchants and port archives from the Russian archives of Rostov-on-Don and Taganrog. It is not published. 2.7 Greek Merchant Banking: London, Constantinople was the result of the postdoctoral programme titled ‘From Constantinople to the City of London. Greek Bankers, 1820–1880’, Ionian University, 2011–14 with Dr Katerina Galani as the postdoctoral

46

Harlaftis

researcher and Gelina Harlaftis as the academic advisor, financed by the Ministry of Development and EU. The database contains valuable data on Greek merchants in England from the Bank of England from the series Discount Office: Discounters’ Ledgers (1845–58); Discount Regulations, Procedure and Practice; Discount Office: Rating Books, showing each discounter’s credit limit; Discount Office: Applications for Discount Accounts (1839–49, 1850–70); Discount Office: List of Acceptors (1809–72); Discount Office: Greek Accounts (1848–52); Drawings Office: Private Drawings Office (1850). From the above sources, the Accounts of Vagliano Brothers in the Bank of England were constructed from the detailed daily transactions of the Firm Vagliano Brothers during the period 1858–81. 2.8 The research project ‘The Black Sea and Its Port Cities, 1774–1914: Development, Convergence and Linkages with the Global Economy’, Ionian University, 2012–15, Action ‘Thales’, was financed by the Greek National Strategic Reference Framework, the EU and the Greek Ministry of Education. The project was led by the Department of History of the Ionian University (project coordinator: Gelina Harlaftis) in collaboration with the Institute for Mediterranean Studies-FORTH, the University of Crete, the National Hellenic Research Foundation, the University of Thessaly and the University of the Aegean. It also involved twenty-three academic institutions – universities, research institutes and archives – from the Black Sea countries, i.e. Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Russia and Georgia, as well as from Moldavia, Norway, Italy, Israel and the United States. The main research group consisted of nineteen scholars and the external collaborators research group consisted of seventy-one scholars (professors, senior researchers, young researchers: PhD holders, PhD students, postgraduate students), of whom 57% were Greek and 43% were foreigners. The Black Sea databases, Jason, Argo, Golden Fleece, Argonauts, Medea and Black Sea Historical Statistics, were the result of the Black Sea project, as shown in Table 2.1. Moreover, the Black Sea project contains the ‘Black Sea Port Cities – Interactive History, 1780s–1910s’, an interactive history of twenty-four port cities (Varna, Burgas, Constantza, Braila, Galatz, Nikolayev, Odessa, Kherson, Eupatoria, Sebastopol, Theodosia, Kerch, Berdyansk, Mariupol, Taganrog, Rostov-on-Don, Novorossiysk, Batoum, Trabzon, Giresun, Samsun, Sinop, Istanbul  – and Nezhyn as a ‘land port’). Uploaded in www .blacksea.gr, it is written by more than forty historians from the Ukraine, Russia, Georgia, Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Greece, specialists of the port cities. It contains more than 1,500 templates – in the form of encyclopaedic entries – of more than 2,500 pages for all port cities, as well as a profuse photographic collection of peoples and places. For each port city there are templates in the following five categories: (1) Administration; (2) Urban Landscape and Geography; (3) Culture and Community; (4) Economy and Infrastructure; (5) Statistics. The statistics are based on the Black Sea Statistical series as described below. 2.9 The SeaLiT–FastCat database is under construction. It is the result of the project Seafaring Lives in Transition, Mediterranean Maritime Labour and Shipping, 1850s–1920s

Navigating Greek Historiography

47

(SeaLiT), IMS-FORTH, 2017–22, with Apostolos Delis as Principal Investigator, funded by the European Research Council Starting Grant 2016. The database produced by this project is by far the most modern and technologically advanced. The digitised data of the project are grouped into four broad categories: legal entities, persons, ships and locations. The FastCat data entry system enables researchers to match the abovementioned categories within and between sources. Data are retrieved from Greek, Russian, Ukrainian, Italian, French and Spanish archives and range from demographic evidence of the maritime population, to ship and seafaring labour registries, to business records of steamship companies and notarial archives of maritime communities. The unpublished databases above that are not published in www.marehist.gr or www .blacksea.gr can be accessed on demand from [email protected].

Bibliography Abulafia   David, The Great Sea: A Human History of the Mediterranean (London: Penguin Books, 2011). Abulafia David, The Boundless Sea: A Human History of the Oceans (London: Allen Lane, 2019). Broeze Frank, ‘From the Periphery to the Mainstream: The Challenge of Australia’s Maritime History’, The Great Circle 11/1 (1989), 1–14. Carras Ioannis, ‘Εμπόριο, Πολιτική και Αδελφότητα: Ρωμιοί στη Ρωσία 1700–1774’ [Trade, Politics and Brotherhood: The Greeks in Russia 1700–1774] (PhD thesis, University of Athens, 2011). Delis Apostolos, ‘Seafaring Lives at the Crossroads of Mediterranean Maritime History’, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 464–478. Delis Apostolos, ‘Parallel Growth to Great Divergence: Greek Shipbuilding from the Late Eighteenth to Early Twentieth Centuries’, History of Technology 33, Special Issue, Stathis Arapostathis and Aristotle Tympas (eds), History of Technology in Greece from the Nineteenth to the Twenty-first Century (London: Bloomsbury, 2017), 21–46. Delis Apostolos, ‘Modern Greece’s First Industry? The Shipbuilding Centre of Sailing Merchant Marine of Syros, 1830–70’, European Review of Economic History 19/3 (2015), 255–74. Delis Apostolos, ‘A Mediterranean Insular Port City in Transition: Economic Transformations, Space Antagonisms and Landscape Metamorphosis in Nineteenth-century Hermoupolis on the Island of Syros’, Urban History 42/2 (May 2015), 225–45. Fischer Lewis R., ‘The Future Course of Maritime History’, International Journal of Maritime History 29/2 (May 2017), 355–64.

48

Harlaftis

Galani Katerina, ‘The Galata Bankers and the International Banking of the Greek Business Group in the 19th Century’ in Edhem Eldem and Sophia Laiou (eds), Istanbul and the Black Sea Coast: Trade and Shipping (1770–1820) (Istanbul: Isis, 2018). Galani Katerina, ‘Η Ελληνική κοινότητα του Λονδίνου τον 19ο αιώνα. Μια κοινωνική και οικονομική προσέγγιση’ [The Greek Community in London in the 19th Century: A Social and Economic Approach], Τα Ιστορικά [Ta Historika] 63 (April 2016), 43–68. Galani Katerina, ‘Greek Merchant Bankers in the City of London: The First Settlement (Early 19th Century)’ in Anglo-Greek Relations: Aspects of Their Recent Histories, edited by the Hellenic Parliament Foundation and the British Embassy in Athens (Athens, 2014). Glasmeier Amy K., ‘Economic Geography in Practice: Local Economic Development Policy’ in Clark, Feldman and Gertler, The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, 559–79. Grammenos Costas (ed.), The Handbook of Maritime Economics and Business (London: Lloyd’s of London Press, 2002). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘The True History of the Sea: A Maritime History: A New Version of the Old Version’, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 383–402. Harlaftis Gelina, Creating Global Shipping: Aristotle Onassis, the Vagliano Brothers and the Business of Shipping, c.1820–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019). Harlaftis Gelina, Victoria Konstantinova, Igor Lyman, Anna Sydorenko and Eka Tchkoidze (eds), Between Grain and Oil: The Integration of the Port Cities of the Eastern Coast of the Black Sea to the Global Economy, Late 18th–Early 20th Centuries (Rethymnon: Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 3, www.blacksea.gr, 2020). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Shipping’ in Teresa da Silva Lopes, Christina Lubinski and Heidi Tworek (eds), The Routledge Companion to the Makers of Global Business (Abingdon, Oxon/New York: Routledge, 2019). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘The Onassis Global Shipping Business: 1920s–1950s’, Business History Review 88/2 (Summer 2014), 241–71. Harlaftis Gelina and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821: The Heyday before the Greek Revolution] (Athens: Kedros Publications, 2013). Harlaftis Gelina and George Kostelenos, ‘International Shipping and National Economic Growth: Shipping Earnings and the Greek Economy in the Nineteenth Century’, The Economic History Review 65/4 (2012), 1403–27. Harlaftis Gelina, Stig Tenold and Jésus M. Valdaliso (eds), World’s Key Industry: History and Economics of International Shipping (London: Palgrave, 2012). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘International Business of Southeastern Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean, 18th Century: Sources, Methods and Interpretive Issues’ in Dove va la storia economica? Metodi e prospettive. Secc. XIII–XVIII [Where is Economic History Going? Methods and Prospects from the 13th to the 18th Centuries], Atti

Navigating Greek Historiography

49

della ‘Quarantaduesima Settimana di Studi’, 18–22 April 2010, edited by Francesco Ammannati (Florence: Firenze University Press, 2011). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘“L’histoire maritime en Grèce”, La recherche internationale en histoire maritime: essai d’évaluation’, Revue d’histoire maritime 10–11 (2010), 75–97. Harlaftis Gelina et al. (eds), The New Ways of History (London: IB Tauris, 2009). Harlaftis Gelina, Helen Thanopoulou and Ioannis Theotokas, Το Παρόν και το Μέλλον της Ελληνικής Ναυτιλίας [The Present and the Future of Greek Shipping], Research Study no. 10, Office of Economic Studies (Athens: Academy of Athens, 2009). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Οι Έλληνες εφοπλιστές και ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής’ [Greek Shipowners and Constantine Karamanlis] in Constantinos Svolopoulos, Konstantina Botsiou and Evanthis Hatzivassiliou (eds), Ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής στον εικοστό αιώνα [Constantinos Karamanlis in the Twentieth Century], Proceedings of the International Academic Conference, Zappeion, 5–9 June 2007, vol. 3 (Athens: Foundation ‘Constantinos Karamanlis’, 2008), 92–112. Harlaftis Gelina, ‘From Diaspora Traders to Shipping Tycoons: The Vagliano Bros.’, Business History Review 81/2 (Summer 2007), 237–68. Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Maritime History Since Braudel’, Proceedings, 4th International Congress of Maritime History, Corfu 21–27 June 2004, International Maritime Economic History Association (IMEHA), CD (Corfu, 2005). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Mapping the Greek Maritime Diaspora from the Early 18th to the late 20th Century’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis and Ioanna Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Five Centuries of History (Oxford: Berg Publications, 2005), 147–69. Harlaftis Gelina and Carmel Vassalo (eds), New Directions in Mediterranean Maritime History, Research in Maritime History, no. 28 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2004). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Η Ναυτιλιακή Ιστορία “εν πλω και υπ’ατμόν”’ [Maritime History ‘at Sea and on Steam’] in Paschalis Kitromilidis and Triantafyllos E. Sklavenitis (eds), Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδος, 1833–2002 [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece, 1833–2002], Proceedings, vol. B (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 425–45. Harlaftis Gelina and John Theotokas, ‘European Family Firms in International Business: British and Greek Tramp-Shipping Firms’, Business History 46 (April 2004), 219–55. Harlaftis Gelina, Helen Beneki and Manos Haritatos, Ploto, Greek Shipowners from the Late 18th Century to the Eve of WWII (Athens: ELIA/Niarchos Foundation, 2003 [in Greek and English]). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Storia marittima e storia dei porti’ in Memoria e Ricerca, vol. 2 (September–October 2002), 5–21. Harlaftis Gelina (ed.), Ιστορία και Ναυτιλία [History and Shipping] (Athens: Alexandria, 2001).

50

Harlaftis

Harlaftis Gelina, ‘The Maritime Historiography of Greece since 1975’ in Frank Broeze (ed.), Maritime History at the Crossroads, Research in Maritime History, no. 9 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 1995), 135–49. Harlaftis Gelina, Greek Shipowners and Greece 1945–1975 (London: Athlone Press, 1993). Harlaftis Gelina, A History of Greek-owned Shipping (London: Routledge, 1993). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Το εμποροναυτιλιακό δίκτυο των Ελλήνων της Διασποράς και η ανάπτυξη της ελληνικής ναυτιλίας τον 19ο αιώνα: 1830–1860’ [The Commercial and Maritime Network of the Diaspora Greeks and the Development of Greek Shipping in the 19th Century: 1830–1860], Μμήμον [Mnemon] 15 (1993), 69–127. Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Εφοπλιστές και κρατικός παρεμβατισμός’ [Shipowners and State Intervention], Istorika 6/10 (June 1989), 105–26. Horden Peregrine and Nicholas Purcell, The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2000). Kapetanakis Panayotis, ‘Ο ποντοπόρος εμπορικός στόλος των Επτανήσων κατά την διάρκεια της βρετανικής κατοχής και προστασίας και η κεφαλληνιακή υπεροχή (1809/1815–1864)’ [The Deep-Sea Going Merchant Fleet of the Seven Islands of the Ionian Sea During the Time of British Conquest and Protection and the Cephalonian Prominence (1809/1815–1864)] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2010). Kapetanakis Panayotis, ‘The Ionian State in the “British” Nineteenth Century, 1814–1864: From Adriatic Isolation to Atlantic Integration’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/1 (June 2010), 163–84. Leconte Casimir, Étude économique de la Grèce, de sa position actuelle, de son avenir, suivie de documents sur le commerce de l’Orient, sur l’Égypte (Paris: n.p., 1847). Lewis Martin W. and Kären Wigen, ‘A Maritime Response to the Crisis in Area Studies’, The Geographical Review 89/2 (April 1999), 161–8. Lyberatos Andreas, Οικονομία, πολιτική και εθνική ιδεολογία η διαμόρφωση των εθνικών κομμάτων στη Φιλιππούπολη του 19ου αιώνα [Economy, Politics and National Ideology: The Formation of National Parties in Philipoupoli of 19th Century] (Herakleion: Crete University Press, 2009). North Michael, The Baltic. A History (Cambridge M.A., 2015). Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘The Byzantine and Greek Maritime Marines (Maritime Enterprises) in the Medieval Mediterranean’ in Michel Balard (ed.), Histoire Maritime: Le Moyen-Age, Oceanides (Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer, 2017), 424–35. Pagratis Gerassimos D., Βενετικό Κράτος της Θάλασσας. Οι ναυτιλιακές επιχειρήσεις της Κέρκυρας, 1496–1538 [Society and Economy in the Venetian ‘Stato da Mar’: The Shipping Enterprises of Corfu (1496–1538)] (Athens: Pedio, 2013). Pagratis Gerassimos D. ‘Shipping Enterprise in the Eighteenth Century: The Case of the Greek Subjects of Venice’, Mediterranean Historical Review 25/1 (2010), 67–81. Pallis Athanassios (ed.), Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm (Oxford: Elsevier, 2007).

Navigating Greek Historiography

51

Papadopoulou Alexandra, ‘The Black Sea Historical Statistics, 1812–1914: A Short Introduction’, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 451–463. Papadopoulou Alexandra, ‘Ναυτιλιακές επιχειρήσεις, διεθνή δίκτυα και θεσμοί στη σπετσιώτικη εμπορική ναυτιλία, 1830–1870. Οργάνωση, διοίκηση και στρατηγική’ [Maritime Businesses, International Networks and Institutions in the Merchant Shipping of the Island of Spetses: Organisation, Administration and Strategy] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2010). Pearson Michael, The Indian Ocean (London & New York: Routledge, 2003). Porter Michael, ‘Location, Competition and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy’, Economic Development Quarterly 14/1 (2000), 15–34. Porter Michael, ‘Locations, Clusters and Company Strategy’ in Gordon L. Clark, Maryann P. Feldman and Meric S. Gertler (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 253–74. Sifneos Evrydiki, Imperial Odessa: Peoples, Spaces, Identities (Leiden: Brill, 2017). Sifneos Evrydiki and Gelina Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής, 18ος–αρχές 20ού αιώνα. Νέες προσεγγίσεις στην ιστορία των Ελλήνων της νότιας Ρωσίας [Greeks in the Azov, 18th– Beginning of 20th Century: New Approaches in the History of the Greeks in South Russia], National Research Foundation, Institute of Historical Research (Athens, 2015). Skopetea Elli, To ‘Πρότυπο Βασίλειο’ και η μεγάλη ιδέα [The ‘Model’ Kingdom and the Great Idea] (Athens: Polytypo, 1988). Skountis Vassilis, ‘Ναυτική εργασία και ελληνικό κράτος. Τάσεις εκσυγχρονισμού στο μεσοπόλεμο’ [Seafaring Labour and the Greek State: Modernization Trends During the Interwar Period] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2018). Thanopoulou Helen, Ελληνική και Διεθνής Ναυτιλία [Greek and International Shipping] (Athens: Papazisis, 1994). Theotokas Ioannis and Gelina Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping: Greek Family Firms in International Business (London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2009). Theotokas Ioannis, Maria B. Lekakou, Athanasios Pallis, Theodoros Syriopoulos and Ioannis Tsamourgelis,, Ελληνική ναυτιλία, απασχόληση και ανταγωνιστικότητα. Στρατηγικές διοίκησης ανθρώπινου δυναμικού [Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness: Strategies for Human Resource Management] (Athens: Gutenberg, 2008). Theotokas Ioannis, ‘Organizational and Managerial Patterns of Greek-owned Shipping Companies, 1969–1990’ (Piraeus: University of Piraeus, 1997). Tsouderos Emmanuel J., Le Relèvement Économique de la Grèce (Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1919). Wick Alexis, The Red Sea. In search of Lost Space, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2016). Zakharov Viktor, Gelina Harlaftis and Olga Katsiardi-Hering (eds), Merchant ‘Colonies’ in the Early Modern Period (15th–18th Centuries) (London: Chatto & Pickering, 2012).

Chapter 3

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism: Research in the Early Modern Maritime History of the Greek Subjects of Venice Gerassimos D. Pagratis About twenty years ago, in April 2002, in the context of the first meeting of the Mediterranean Maritime History Network conducted in Malta and accompanied by the publication of a text with goals analogous to those at hand here, I had the opportunity to examine the historiography of the shipping history of the Greeks between the fifteenth and seventeenth centuries.1 Since then, I have become interested in the sources that could be further examined as well as in the methodological difficulties encountered in the process of this research.2 Since the turn of the millennium, research in Maritime History has been prolific. In the following article, mindful of the goals of the editors of this volume, I will attempt an assessment of the recent historiography based on the shipping enterprises of the Greek subjects of Venice in the early modern period, focusing on my research activities. Key concepts in this research, such as space, time, the underlying conditions of the shipping enterprise and the related methodological questions, will play an introductory role. 1

Conceptual Clarifications

1.1 Space Shipping entrepreneurship, as an economic activity that utilises the surface of the sea for profit through transport and/or trade, allows for a large range of movements. It also inevitably leaves its traces in a much broader space used by people across many professions within a specific political territory. Venice, 1 Gerassimos D. Pagratis, ‘Greek Commercial Shipping (Fifteenth to Seventeenth Centuries): Literature Review and Research Perspectives’, Journal of Mediterranean Studies 12/2 (2002), 411–33. 2 Gerassimos D. Pagratis, ‘Sources for the Maritime History of Greece (Fifteenth to Seventeenth Centuries)’ in Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassallo (eds), New Directions in Mediterranean Maritime History, Research in Maritime History, no. 28 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2004), 125–46.

© Gerassimos D. Pagratis, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_004

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

53

a state constituted of a multitude of islands and coastal regions, could not exert complete control over the movements of its subjects. Even during the peak period of the Serenissima, shipowners operated beyond the boundaries of the Venetian state, in regions with which they maintained economic unity – that is to say, in the Ottoman lands and ports bordering the maritime passage to the Ottoman political centre – both within the greater Mediterranean region and outside of it. 1.2 Legal Status of the Subjects of Venice The understanding of the subordinate position of the Greeks and the resulting restrictions on their shipping activities is a necessary precondition for realising the scope of actions available to them as well as the rationale for these actions. Occasional setbacks and readjustments of goals notwithstanding, the Venetians’ treatment of their eastern territories remained colonial in its nature. The possessions of Venice in the Levant were used to support the interests of the administrative and economic centre, and to help its inhabitants achieve a series of objectives. These included maintaining the position of privileged Venetian merchants, protecting their shipping or industrial enterprises, ensuring the central role of the Venetian marketplace and, finally, securing adequate circulation of nutritional goods among the metropolis and its possessions.3 These objectives were achieved through a variety of policies  – some of which can be linked to protectionism and monopolistic practices as well as to measures that are more mercantilist in nature. Specifically, the main trade policy implemented by the Venetians over a long period included: – Discretionary taxation of Venetians, subjects and foreign merchants – Differentiation of the value of the Venetian ducat in the capital and its territories, from which Venetian merchants benefitted – Protection of Venetian shipping enterprises along with the exclusion of non-Venetians from the transport of preferred goods – Protection of the shipping and industrial enterprises of the metropolis (i.e. the city of Venice) in order to discourage the operation of competitive enterprises in the Venetian Levant – Adoption of monopolistic practices to maintain the central role of the port of Venice in her maritime state and to favour Venetian carriers trading goods from Central and Western Europe, transferring them to the Eastern Mediterranean and vice-versa 3 Gerassimos D. Pagratis, Κοινωνία και Οικονομία στο βενετικό Κράτος της Θάλασσας: Οι ναυτιλιακές επιχειρήσεις της Κέρκυρας (1496–1538) [Society and Economy in the Venetian ‘Stato da Mar’: The Shipping Enterprises of Corfu (1496–1538)] (Athens: Pedio, 2013), 113–49.

54

Pagratis

– Establishment of mechanisms to control smuggling and tax evasion – Guarantee of the food supply of the capital and its territories with policies that are both monopolistic and mercantilist in nature.4 In addition to the above points, with regard to the Venetian shipping enterprises, Renard Gluzman recently made a notable contribution to the study of the legal status of private vessels that fly the San Marco flag, a complex subject that scholars have largely tended to avoid.5 He argues that the merchant vessels of all Venetian citizens, citizen-subjects and mere fideles indiscriminately flew the San Marco flag, and that commercial vessels were distinct legal entities, some of which enjoyed privileges denied to others. 1.3 Flexible Identities Faced with such measures, it was only natural that subjects of these territories searched for alternative channels to pursue more favourable business conditions. The demographic composition of the Greek population in the coastal areas of the Eastern Mediterranean, along with the political fragmentation between Venice and the Ottoman Empire, allowed for a wide range of options, which took shape both lawfully (embedded within Venetian maritime trade) and unlawfully. For example, merchants from Zakynthos in the late sixteenth century maintained an open trade route between Venice and England on the Venetians’ behalf. This led to the unravelling of the central role of Greeks within Venetian maritime trade and illuminates the decreasing Venetian interest in direct pursuit of maritime trade and the subsequent facilitation of the participation of Greeks in this trade.6 But there are other findings that must be taken into account for a comprehensive understanding of this subject: the options that were considered illegal under Venetian law. For example, in the beginning of the sixteenth century boat captains in Corfu were indicted by Venetian authorities for their cooperation with Ottoman merchants, as they used to carry cargo to the competitive 4 Pagratis, Κοινωνία και Οικονομία, 113–49. 5 Renard Gluzman, ‘What Makes a Ship Venetian? (13th–16th Centuries)’ in Georg Christ and Franz-Julius Morche (eds) Cultures of Empire: Rethinking Venetian Rule 1400–1700. A Festschrift for Benjamin Arbel, The Medieval Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill, 2020), 8–311. 6 See Maria Fusaro, ‘Commercial Networks in the Early Modern World’ in Diogo Ramada Curto and Anthony Molho (eds), EUI Working Paper, HEC, no. 2 (Florence: European University Institute, 2002), 121–47. Maria Fusaro, ‘Coping with Transition: Greek Merchants and Shipowners between Venice and England in the Late Sixteenth Century’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis, Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (Oxford and New York: Berg, 2005), 95–123. See also Ugo Tucci, ‘I Greci nella vita marittima veneziana’ in Maria Francesca Tiepolo & Eurigio Tonetti (eds), I Greci a Venezia (Venice: Istituto veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti, 2002), 243–55.

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

55

routes of the Italian peninsula (e.g. Lanciano and Recanati).7 In the same period, captains in the Ionian region traded goods between Africa and various Ottoman ports. Some relocated their business headquarters to the neighbouring Ottoman shores; this happened in the eighteenth century with natives of Cephalonia and Ithaca who moved to Messolonghi and Etoliko to avoid Venetian protectionism and burdensome taxation. Others, from Venetian territories in Morea that had passed into Ottoman hands, made use of their acquaintances in the formerly Venetian territories of the Peloponnese (Patra, Methoni, Koroni) where they often had surviving relatives. They transported goods between Morea and Venice.8 Another aspect of the flexible identity of these Greeks is evidenced in Molly Greene’s research Catholic Pirates and Greek Merchants: A History of the Mediterranean in the Age of Piracy, which links the religious with the entrepreneurial in the seventeenth century.9 In particular, Greene analyses the courses of action taken by Greek shipowners (subjects of the Sultan) who had been victims of a raid conducted by members of the Order of St John of Malta. Based on records located in the State Archives of Malta, Greene reconstructed the line of the argument made by shipowners to reclaim their ships and cargoes. The most important was an invocation of allegiance to the Pope, made possible by the union of churches reached by the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438–9). Greene examines a series of parallel roles taken on by Greek traders and shipowners: Ottoman spies employed by Venetians; experienced sailors on the warships of major Eastern Mediterranean forces. These roles exemplified the flexibility that constituted the comparative advantage of the Greek businessman in early modern times – a Christian but not a Catholic, Ottoman and yet not Muslim. This shows that the unifying factor of all these shipowners and traders was not limited to varying nationalities and existing sovereignties – in fact, it was defined by a shared ethnicity. The Venetian archival sources are an excellent place to search for the definitions of Greek ethnicity in early modern times, because they were produced in a country with traditionally close relations to 7 Pagratis, Κοινωνία και Οικονομία, 137–45. 8 Pagratis, Κοινωνία και Οικονομία, 113–49. Pagratis, ‘Shipping Enterprise in the Eighteenth Century: The Case of the Greek Subjects of Venice’, Mediterranean Historical Review 25/1 (2010), 67–81. Pagratis, ‘Venice, the Sea and the Greeks: The Maritime Policy of the Venetian State and the Entrepreneurial Activities of the Greek Subjects During the 16th Century’ in Ruthy Gertwagen and Jean Claude Hocquet (eds), Venice and the Mediterranean (XIII–XVIII centuries), Studi Veneziani 67 (2013), 253–66. 9 Molly Greene, Catholic Pirates and Greek Merchants: A History of the Mediterranean in the Age of Piracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010).

56

Pagratis

the Greeks. For the Venetians, Greci were Orthodox, spiritual subjects of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. Typically, this included all the Orthodox populations of the Eastern Mediterranean, and thus the Slavs. A few Serbs and Montenegrins were part of the Brotherhood of St Nicholas, which would soon, in the early sixteenth century, be dominated by Greeks arriving mostly from Venetian and Ottoman territories.10 1.4 Greek Shipping or Shipping of the Greeks? I believe we are now better equipped to address such a question. The use of the ethnic identification ‘Greek’ during the early modern period has already been a subject of discussion and critique.11 This critique – not fully elaborated or accompanied by adequate justification  – underlines the lack of a Greek state and the overwhelming power of Ottoman and Venetian shipowners of the period. As is the case with all controversial definitions, the generalisations are related to issues of points of view and fields of application. For example, in the taxation of trade and transport, an issue of great importance to business-owners, ethnicity did not matter nearly as much as sovereignty. This was evident in the flags on ships and shipping documents and corresponded to taxes designated by intergovernmental agreements. There are many documents that confirm this supposition; some go even further. In 1549, a notarial act was signed before the notary Antonios Metaxas in Corfu. In it, a group of Ottoman merchants, shipowners and seafarers from Mytilene, neighbouring areas in the Aegean Sea and Constantinople, appointed local Iacovos Spetzieris as their consul. Notable here is not only the survival until the mid-sixteenth century of the institution of a consul being elected only by a group of merchants and shipowners without the approval of this appointment by the state, but also the fact that among the persons who nominated Spetzieris, invoking their common nazione (γένος), were Christians, Muslims and others.12 Much has already been said and written about the occasional use of shipping documents and flags by Greeks shipowners and their fleeing to other 10

11 12

Fani Mavroidi, Συμβολή στην ιστορία της ελληνικής αδελφότητας Βενετίας στο ΙΣΤ’ αιώνα [Contribution to the History of the Greek Brotherhood of Venice in the XVI Century. Registry Records II (1533–1562)] (Athens: n.p., 1976); Fani Mavroidi, ‘Οι Σέρβοι και η Ελληνική Αδελφότητα της Βενετίας’ [The Serbs and the Greek Brotherhood of Venice], Balkan Studies 24/2 (1983), 511–29 [in Greek]. Fusaro, ‘Greek Merchants and Shipowners’. Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘Το κονσουλάτον των Μυτιληναίων στην Κέρκυρα (1548–1549)’ [The Consulate of Mytilene in Venetian Corfu (1548–1549)], Εώα και Εσπέρια [Eoa kai Esperia] 4 (2000), 22–45 (in Greek).

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

57

countries.13 In the eighteenth century, these countries were the Ottoman Empire (especially in Messolonghi and Etoliko) as well as the Russian Black Sea, which housed numerous communities of Greek subjects from the Ionian Islands.14 Based on examples such as this, if we claimed there was a shipping business fundamentally based on the Greek ethnicity of its major players, I do not think we would be far from the truth. The most telling source to confirm this hypothesis is the Brotherhood of St Nicholas of the Greeks in Venice, founded in 1498. The Venetians, having already coexisted with the Greeks from the years of Byzantium, treated them both individually, based on citizenship, and as a unified ethnic group. Citizenship was used as a primary factor in the implementation of taxation, where it invariably held more sway. In other areas, however, things were different, especially when Greeks were compared to the Muslim Ottomans. Thus in 1571, a year of dramatic developments such as the loss of Cyprus and the naval battle of Nafpaktos, the Collegio of Venice suggested unified treatment of city-dwelling Greeks, be they subjects of the Doge or the Sultan, reserving favourable treatment for the latter with regard to the Muslim subjects of the Sultan, called Turks.15 In addition to the historical conjuncture created by the war in Cyprus and the loss of significant Venetian territories, at this time the Venetians came into closer contact with the Greeks, alleviating various religious and political conflicts, so they could retain the remaining territories unhindered. It was in this context, after 1577, that Gavriil Seviros, bishop of Philadelphia, emerged as the Greek bishop of the Ecumenical Patriarchate representative of all Orthodox Greeks in the city of Venice.16 Ugo Tucci’s claim about the last years of the sixteenth century  – that we cannot talk of ‘Cretan merchant shipping’17 when referring to ships of Cretan shipowners, subjects of Venice flying the well-earned flag of St Mark – can be enriched with other questions: how Venetian was this ‘Venetian’ fleet?18 That is, 13 14 15 16 17 18

Pagratis, ‘Shipping Enterprise in the Eighteenth Century’, 73. Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘Shipping and Trade in the Ionian Islands: The Merchant Fleet of the Septinsular Republic (1800–1807)’, Journal of the Oxford University Historical Society 8 (Hilary, 2012), www.ouhs.org. General State Archives of Venice, Notatorio del Collegio, vol. 39, f. 91r. See Stathis Birtachas, ‘Un “secondo” vescovo a Venezia: il metropolita di Filadelfia (secoli XVI–XVIII)’ in Maria Francesca Tiepolo and Eurigio Tonetti (eds), I Greci a Venezia (Venice: Istituto Veneto di Scienze, 2002), 103–21. Ugo Tucci, ‘I Greci nella vita marittima veneziana’ in Maria Francesca Tiepolo and Eurigio Tonetti (eds), I Greci a Venezia (Venice, 2002), 250. Ugo Tucci, ‘La marina mercantile veneziana nel Settecento’, Bollettino dell’Istituto di Storia della Società e dello Stato Veneziano 2 (1960), 155–209.

58

Pagratis

to what extent did Venetians, Greeks and Slavs participate in its composition? And is it illegitimate to use the term ‘Cretan merchant fleet’ for a fleet of ships owned by Cretans and manned mostly by Cretans? Extending this question to the remaining Venetian state, is it inappropriate to speak of a Greek merchant fleet composed of Venetians (Greek-speakers, Orthodox Christians, residents of the Eastern Mediterranean) but also subjects of the Sublime Porte, as the fleet belonged to Greek shipowners, used largely a Greek crew and ran mainly on Greek and foreign capital? Finally, taking into account the different time period, how much more ‘Greek’, or Greek-owned  – to use Gelina Harlaftis’s term19 – is the current Greek merchant fleet, composed of giant ships flying flags from various countries, owned by companies of Greek interests (but with non-Greek shareholders), managed by Greeks and non-Greeks alike with a crew made up of Filipinos, Pakistanis, Egyptians, and so on? 1.5 The Times It is obvious that in the early modern period of Venetian history the position of Greek seafarers changed several times, just as the relationship shifted between Venetians’ merchant shipping and their various territories. A basic outline and chronology of the shipping industry of Greek subjects in Venice accompanied by historiographical notes will facilitate the analysis that is to follow. It is easier to begin from the end, from the late eighteenth century. During this period major developments took place in the shipping trade of Greek and Slavic (Dalmatian) subjects of Venice, developments which came at the expense of Venice itself, because these subjects took advantage of opportunities offered by powers such as Russia and Austria. The seventeenth century remains a big question mark. Few thorough studies of the period have been conducted to date, a period defined by the established dominance (after at least thirty years) of non-Mediterranean powers on the routes of the ‘inner sea’ but also by the lack of a power dominant enough to impose peace upon the area, which paved the way for a golden age of privateering for both Christians and Muslims. We arrive now at the sixteenth century, which is well documented and researched, thanks to its status as a transitional period between the late medieval times – the acme of Venetian merchant shippers – and the beginning of the early modern period. In this stage, from the late fifteenth century to the early seventeenth, the Greeks underwent a transition from being marginal players,

19

Gelina Harlaftis, History of the Greek-owned Fleets of the 19th and 20th Centuries (Athens, 2001).

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

59

limited to providing for the capitals and cities of origin, to playing a central role in Venice’s shipping channels. 2

Historiography: A Personal Point of View

The extent of our knowledge about the subject at hand is measured by historical synthesis. With the exception of the old but classic text by G. Leontaritis on the Greek shipping trade, few attempts at analysis have been made in a field that requires much primary research. The introduction in Gelina Harlaftis’s book The History of Greek Shipping poses new questions and suggests new sources for the study of Greek Maritime History as a whole. Molly Greene’s The Sixteenth Century Greek Moment,20 a study of the sixteenth-century maritime activity of the Greeks, provides answers to key questions about the Greek commercial and maritime presence in the Mediterranean. She also highlights the importance of their role in the commercial shipping of the period. The need to focus on the Venetian world, which of course has never been isolated or unaffected by its surroundings, sparked an effort to expand contributions in the study of the history of shipping enterprises of the Venetian state and the Greek involvement therein. One such example is found in the extensive introductory chapter in a volume for shipping enterprises based in Corfu.21 Further, the paper attempted to use knowledge specific to the sixteenth century in an effort to design the developmental phases of the maritime entrepreneurship of Greek subjects of Venice as well as an analysis of qualitative variations and larger characteristics of these enterprises.22 These various texts highlight the methodological characteristics of this research and the availability of archival materials, both of which are closely interrelated. With the exception of part of the eighteenth century and less of the seventeenth century, periods for which it is relatively easy to procure sources such as health records and tax files, one of the major sources for commercial shipping is notary documents. Through this type of historical source, shipping companies can be examined as objects of social and economic history as well as business history. We can infer the trade routes and details of trips but also the social, political and economic status of these maritime merchants; the 20 21 22

Molly Greene, ‘Trading Identities: The Sixteenth Century Greek Moment’ in Adnan A. Husain and K.E. Fleming (eds), A Faithful Sea: The Religious Cultures of the Mediterranean, 1200–1700 (Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2007), 121–48. Pagratis, Κοινωνία και Οικονομία, Chapter 1. Pagratis, ‘Τrade and Shipping in Corfu (1496– 1538)’, International Journal of Maritime History 16/2 (2004), 169–220. Pagratis, ‘Venice, the Sea and the Greeks’.

60

Pagratis

requirements for raising capital and investing profits; the methods of organisation and management of shipping companies; questions of onboard technology and shipbuilding as well as the composition of the crew. This wealth of information, however, requires much time and effort to collect and process until it can shed light on specific periods. The copious work may account for the lack of interest shown by historians in notarial sources. It is very difficult to locate systematic studies on the history of Greek merchant shipping in early modern times. An edited version of my doctoral thesis concerning shipping companies of Corfu from 1496–1538 was recently published, in which I had the opportunity to develop a set of arguments based on notary documents in the archives of Corfu and Venice as well as records of the Venetian administration outlining governmental policies.23 They included: (a) the rules of conduct governing Venetian trade and trade policy, which reflected potential and actual limitations imposed by rulers on the commercial activity of their subjects; (b) the ways in which capital would be invested in the shipping business, with an emphasis on land management and on the exploitation of sources belonging to the state; (c) the spatial structure of the city’s commercial centre;24 (d) the quantitative dimensions of transported goods and public policy concerning their production and movement; (e) the merchant fleet on the island and its emphasis on state shipping policies against subjects as well as on the technical characteristics, construction and qualitative data of the fleet of Corfu;25 (f) the organisation and management of a shipping business as they relate to the limits of shipping companies’ basic organisation and function as well as their structural characteristics, the main productive capabilities of these companies, the types of recruitment conducted by said companies, the composition of the company capital, profits and expenses, distribution of losses as well as methods of securing capital gains and resolution of disputes; and (g) the human resources of these companies, analysed according to their social position and the business strategies implemented.26

23 24 25 26

Pagratis, ‘Sources for the Maritime History of Greece’, 125–46. See Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘L’emporio di Corfu nel 16o secolo’, Mediterranean Chronicle 1 (2011), 239–60. Pagratis, ‘Ships and Shipbuilding in Corfu in the First Half of the Sixteenth Century’, Mediterranea. Rivista di Studi Storici 22 (2011), 237–46. Pagratis, ‘Entrepreneurship and Social and Political Power in the Ionian Islands from the Late 16th to the First Decades of the 17th Century: Some Case-Studies from Venetian-ruled Corfu’ in Cristian Luca, Laurentiu Radvan and Alexandru Simon (eds), Social and Political Elites in Eastern and Central Europe (15th–18th Centuries) (London: School of Slavonic and East European Studies, 2015), 109–20.

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

61

In answering all these questions, I have the impression that the aforementioned book became much more than a study of the shipping businesses on a single island during a specific time period. Furthermore, it indicates a path and methodology towards the effective use of archival sources, with many possibilities for research in the history of shipping. The case of Corfu takes us to the very beginning of Greek shipping, focusing on the first commercial fleet developed by subjects of Venice in the early modern period – nearly a century before the start of trade between Venice and England. This was a period of transition for the Venetian merchant fleet, characterised by the shift away from a symbiosis between state and private sector and a growing dominance of the latter. This gave underprivileged shipowners such as Greek-Venetian subjects and other foreigners the chance to take on the transport of goods that were carried by privileged Venetian competitors up to that point. However, although we know much about the maritime trade of the leading social groups in Venice, the same does not apply to the Serenissima’s subjects. As is apparent from various appraisals of Venetian maritime historiography, whereas many studies took an interest in the Venetian dominions in the Eastern Mediterranean – that is, the Stato da Mar – and their importance from a geo-strategic and commercial viewpoint, there has not been corresponding interest in the people living in the possessions and in their merchant-shipping activities.27 Among the few exceptions are the recent studies by Renard Gluzman of Venetian merchant shipping and that of Venetian subjects, focusing on a variety of extremely interesting fields. In an article from 2010, Gluzman argues that Mediterranean seafarers did not have any technological or mental barrier that prevented them from sailing the high seas. This argument is based on the study of over 130 recorded voyages found in diaries and travelogues of pilgrims and other travellers, as well as his personal experience of sailing these waters.28 Gluzman’s ‘Notes on Venice’s Ship-breaking Industry and the Scrap Market in the Sixteenth-Century’ sheds valuable light on this largely obscure yet

27

28

Ugo Tucci, ‘La Storiografia Marittima sulla Repubblica di Venezia’ in A. Di Vittorio (ed.), Tendenze e orientamenti nella storiografia marittima contemporanea (Naples, 1986), 151– 73. G. Zalin, ‘Considerazioni sulla storiografia marittima veneziana tra Basso Medioevo e Settecento’ in Antonio Di Vittorio and Carlos B. López (eds), La Storiografia Marittima in Italia e in Spagna in età moderna e contemporanea. Tendenze, orientamenti, linee evolutive (Bari: Cacucci Editore, 2001), 121–54. Renard Gluzman, ‘Between Venice and the Levant: Re-evaluating Maritime Routes from the Fourteenth to the Sixteenth Century’, The Mariner’s Mirror 96/3 (August 2010), 262–92.

62

Pagratis

crucial practice that ensured the republic a steady supply of reusable materials directed towards building new ships, edifices and infrastructures.29 A collaborative work in progress of Gluzman and Pagratis charts Venice’s maritime flows in the course of one calendar year with the aid of trajectory maps. So far, two such maps have been produced to cover Venice’s marine traffic for the years 1497 and 1514. By comparing the maps, the authors explore behavioural patterns, changing trends and anomalies in the shipping market over time.30 As far as Venice’s merchant marine is concerned, Gluzman’s monograph, currently in progress, will present a more accurate picture of the fluctuation of gross tonnage in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. To a great extent, this contribution would be a critical dialogue with Frederic Lane’s well known and highly influential article – first published in 1933 and reprinted in 1966 – dealing with the vicissitudes of Venetian trade and shipping during the long sixteenth century.31 The studies by Maria Fusaro also focus on the people living in the possessions; they place the beginning of shipping enterprises of one of the ethnic categories of Venetian subjects, the Greeks, in the late sixteenth century.32 The developments described by Fusaro date from when the transition from the exclusive investment of Venetians in sea trade to the diversification of their capital in land and sea had already been completed.33 It was precisely during the void of this transitional phase that the shipowners of Zante took advantage; for a few years they kept open the trade route linking Venice and its possessions in the Levant with England, thus connecting the local trading network of the subjects with the inter-regional network of Venice and international trade. 29 30

31

32 33

Renard Gluzman, ‘Notes on Venice’s Ship-breaking Industry and the Scrap Market in the Sixteenth Century’, Journal of European Economic History 2 (September 2018), 83–95. Renard Gluzman and Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘Tracking Venice’s Maritime Traffic in the First Age of Globalization: A Geospatial Analysis’, Proceedings of the Reti maritime come fattori dell’integrazione europea, in 50ª Settimana di Studi, Fondazione F. Datini, Prato (13–17 Maggio 2018) (Prato, forthcoming [F. Datini]). Frederic Lane, ‘Venetian Shipping During the Commercial Revolution’ in Brian Pullan (ed.), Crisis and Change in the Venetian Economy in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (London: Methuen, 1968), 22–46 (originally reprinted in American Historical Review 38 [1933], 219–39). See Fusaro, ‘Commercial Networks in the Early Modern World’. Fusaro, ‘Les Anglais et le Grecs. Un réseau de cooperation commerciale en Méditerranée vénitienne’, Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 58/3 (2003), 605–25; Fusaro, ‘Coping with Transition’. See in Aldo Stella, ‘La crisi economica veneziana nella seconda metà del secolo XVI’, Archivio Veneto 93–94 (1956), 17–69. U. Tucci, ‘La psicologia del mercante veneziano nel Cinquecento’, in Navi, mercanti, monete nel Cinquecento veneziano (Bologna, 1981), 43–94.

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

63

It is obvious that the emergence of all these exceptional cases of Ionian merchants and shipowners in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries presupposes the existence not only of favourable international circumstances but also of the substrate on which the subjects acquired the necessary experience. The local merchant fleets, such as the one based in Corfu, provided the subject shipowners with the necessary exposure to and experience of the industry to progress. These Greek subjects of Venice managing these local fleets, living and working on islands and coastal areas frequented by state-organised galleys and private ships, had the opportunity not only to learn the tactics and methods of international maritime trade, but also to become acquainted with its main protagonists and corresponding institutions. A History of Commercial and Cultural Coexistence 2.1 Early on, consulates representing the dominant nations and trading communities of the Ottoman Empire existed on the islands. In Corfu, in 1515, a Spanish consulate operated which extended its jurisdiction to shipowners from the kingdoms of Naples and Genova. The function of this consulate, dated four decades earlier than previously thought, seems to be related to the needs of commerce. However, there are also indications that the families of the consul and vice-consul (both from Corfu) were involved in espionage, an activity which would come to characterise the work of subsequent consuls of Spain in the Eastern Mediterranean.34 Around the mid-sixteenth century in Corfu, the existence of other consulates, such as those of Ragusa and Genoa, was confirmed. The same island which played a central role in the Venetian commercial and administrative system was also home to the oldest consulate known to date of a trading community of the Ottoman Empire – the consulate of Mytilene, headed by the native merchant Iacovos Spetzieris. The consul, chosen by a group of shipowners 34

Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘Οι απαρχές της παρουσίας των Ισπανών στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο μετά τις γεωγραφικές ανακαλύψεις: το προξενείο του αυθέντη ρηγός της Ισπανίας στη βενετοκρατούμενη Κέρκυρα (1515)’ [The Origins of Spanish Presence in the Eastern Mediterranean After the Geographical Discoveries: The Consulate of Spain in Venetian Corfu (1515)], Κερκυραϊκά Χρονικά [Kerkyraika Chronica] 6 (2012), 235–45. See also Ioannis Hassiotis, Σχέσεις Ελλήνων και Ισπανών στην Τουρκοκρατία [Relationships Between Greeks and Spaniards During the Turkish Occupation] (Athens: n.p., 1968); Ioannis Hassiotis, Οι Έλληνες στις παραμονες της ναυμαχίας της Ναυπάκτου [The Greeks on the Eve of the Battle of Lepanto] (Thessaloniki, 1970), Chapter 2. Ioannis Hassiotis, ‘Venezia ei domini veneziani tramite di informazioni sui Turchi per gli Spagnoli nel sec. XVI’ in Hans-Georg Beck, Manoussos Manoussacas, Agostino Pertusi (eds), Venezia, Centro di Mediazione tra Est ed Ovest (secoli XV–XVI). Aspetti e problemi, vol. 1 (Florence: Olschki Editore, 1977), 117–36.

64

Pagratis

and traders of common citizenship and recognised by the state of Venice, possessed the characteristics of many consuls at the time – commercial, administrative, juridical. He thus represented the survival of an institution from the Middle Ages that continued to function for another two and a half centuries directed towards Western- Ottoman trade, primarily with Venice.35 The function of all these institutions representing traders is linked to a qualitative change in the entrepreneurship of Greeks at sea. The steadily decreasing interest of Venetian nobles in the direct pursuit of maritime trade was due in part to increasing competition from forces that managed to obtain trading privileges with the capitulations of the Ottomans (France, England and Netherlands). This led to an opening of space and further opportunities for foreigners and subjects of Venice, traders and shipowners.36 Another key factor in the transformation of the Greek shipping enterprise was the arrival of Sephardic Jews through Puglia to Venice. These Jews had large sums of capital and substantial global networks and were sought after in many European countries.37 A study in its initial phase indicates a clear connection between the development of merchant shipping of Greeks and the financial support of Jews living in Corfu and Zakynthos.38 For Greek-Venetian subjects, much of the money that financed shipping ventures came from subjects of the Sultan. Generally, in the entire sixteenth century, the Venetian islands benefitted from the active presence of Ottoman traders and shippers who had Venice as their final destination and took advantage of incentives granted by Venetian law. Moreover, in studying the economic histories of shipowners and merchants from Corfu and Zakynthos after the 1640s, it appears that several are settlers either from the opposite shores or from former Venetian possessions such as Methoni, Koroni, Nafplio and Monemvasia. These were people who came from areas rich in agricultural produce and raw materials under Ottoman rule, and they retained systematic trade relations with their places of origin, as they usually left friends and relatives behind.39

35 36 37

38 39

Pagratis, ‘Sources for the Maritime History of Greece’, 132–3. Pagratis, ‘Venice, the Sea and the Greeks’. Also see Chapter 4 in this volume (K. Galani). See Benjamin Ravid, ‘A Tale of Three Cities and Their Raison d’Etat: Ancona, Venice, Livorno and the Competition for Jewish Merchants in the Sixteenth Century’ in Alisa Meyuhas Ginio (ed.), Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Mediterranean World After 1492 (London: Routledge, 1992), 138–62. Gerassimos D. Pagratis, ‘Jews in Corfu’s Economy (From the Late-Fifteenth to Midsixteenth Century)’, Mediterranean Historical Review 27/2 (2012), 189–98. See more in Pagratis, ‘Venice, the Sea and the Greeks’.

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

65

2.2 Greek Shipping Through the Lens of Different Sources Emphasis on notary documents should not underestimate other sources relevant to Greek shipping history, particularly those related to fiscal goals. The reconstruction of the Church of St George in Venice led the Greek Brotherhood to impose a special tax on Greek ships sailing to the port of the city. From the ledgers created to document these transactions, we have access to more than 400 names of Greek seafarers and shipowners, subjects of both the Doge and the Sultan, who used about thirty ships from 1536 to 1576.40 Our knowledge of the role of Greeks in Venetian shipping was broadened by a census of the Venetian fleet conducted in 1558, which survives today in the archives of the Correr Museum in Venice. The document includes the names and ages of the captains manning the largest Venetian ships of the period, with a capacity between 300 and 720 tons (500–1,200 botti). A preliminary analysis of this document reveals that 27% of these people were Greeks (16 out of 59).41 In the period between 1598 and 1599, roughly twenty captains, subjects of the Porte, sailed into the port of Venice and paid anchoring taxes. They sailed aboard small and medium-sized ships (karamousalia, skiratza) from the Aegean Islands (mainly Patmos and Mytilene but also Rhodes and Skyros) as well as from Lefkada.42 The problem with sources such as these, which are otherwise quite valuable, is their fragmentation. That is to say, they are largely disconnected from the space and time in which they were produced and are not part of a wider range of archival material that would offer comprehensive data. Furthermore, with the exception of tax documents, these sources are not connected to the market, the area closely related to trade and other transactions.

40

41

42

See George S. Ploumidis, Οι Βενετοκρατούμενες Ελληνικές χώρες μεταξύ του δεύτερου και του τρίτου Τουρκο-βενετικού πολέμου (1503–1537) [Venetian-held Greek Countries Between the Second and Third Turco-Venetian War (1503–1537)] (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 1974), 113–14, 117–21. Krista Panagiotopoulou, ‘Έλληνες ναυτικοί και πλοιοκτήτες από τα παλαιότερα οικονομικά κατάστιχα της Ελληνικής Αδελφότητας Βενετίας’ [Greek Shipowners and Sailors from the Oldest Financial Books of the Greek Brotherhood of Venice], Θησαυρίσματα [Thesaurismata] 11 (1974), 308–28. Museo Civico Correr di Venezia, Donà dalle Rose, cod. 217, ff. 36r, 39r. List published by Stefanos Kaklamanis, ‘Marcos Defaranas (1503–1575). “Zakinthios stichourgos tou 16ου aiona”’, Thisavrismata 21 (1991), 302–5, commented on by Jean Claude Hocquet, ‘La gente di mare’ in Alberto Tenenti and Ugo Tucci (eds), Storia di Venezia 3, Il mare (Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia italiana, 1991), 482–3. Museo Civico Correr di Venezia, Donà dalle Rose, b. 217, f. 278r. Cc. Alberto Tenenti, Naufrages, Corsaires et Assurances maritimes à Venise 1592–1609 (Paris: SEVPEN, 1959), 563–7.

66

Pagratis

Besides notarial documents, sources associated with the marketplace – and more specifically with insurance – are the proofs of maritime accidents (prove di fortuna). These were used to document nautical accidents, a process undertaken by city authorities. With the proof of damage to a ship and/or crew, compensation was offered by insurers. We have at our disposal such files in the archives of Cephalonia and Kythira.43 At the 2005 Prato Conference for Economic History, I had the opportunity to present data from such sources from the Corfu archives. These sources refer to the risks in the maritime zone extending from Sicily to the northern Adriatic coast from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries. As far as shipwrecks are concerned, it is also worthwhile to mention Gluzman’s ongoing project entitled ‘Early Modern Shipwrecks: Historical Evidence of Shipwrecks in the Levant’, which is a useful online tool that enables marine archaeologists to match their findings with the historical data, or use these data as leads for possible new discoveries.44 Molly Greene’s book Catholic Pirates and Greek Merchants is based on documents from the archives of Malta in the seventeenth century related to maritime danger. Emphasis is given to the multiple roles played by Greek seafarers as members of an agile commercial group, benefitting from the Venetian and Ottoman rule as well as from their ‘flexible’ relationship to Catholicism: as non-Catholic Christians and non-Muslim Ottomans. The fluidity of these identities, at a time of various tensions and dangers in Mediterranean shipping, points to the flexibility of Greek merchants and seamen. They were subjects of both the Doge and Sultan, who managed to pursue their goals even in environments inhospitable to the Orthodox Church. An example is their appeal to the inquisitor of Malta to return to them goods seized by the knights of St John, arguing that, although Ottoman subjects, they were Christians and had been united with the Catholic Church since 1438–9. What occurred in the seventeenth century is traditionally described as a clash between civilisations, specifically a clash between Christians and Muslims, which has reoccurred throughout history. Here it took the form of privateering and piracy. This position, along with the view that the ‘Northerners’ 43

44

Gilberto Zacché, ‘“Prove di fortuna”: Una inedita fonte per lo studio della navigazione commerciale nelle acque di Cefalonia nel XVIII secolo’, Proceedings of the 5th International Panioniou Conference 1 (Argostoli, 1989), 155–79. Angeliki Panopoulou, ‘Αντιξοότητες των ναυτικών του Κρανιδίου στη θάλασσα των Κυθηρων στα τέλη του 18ου αιώνα’ [Vicissitudes of Kranidi Sailors in the Sea of Kythira in the Late Eighteenth Century], Πελοποννησιακά [Peloponnissiaka] 21 (1995) [in Greek]. Renard Gluzman, ‘Early Modern Shipwrecks: Historical Evidence of Shipwrecks in the Levant’: http://www.earlymodernshipwrecks.info/ (last accessed 1 January 2019).

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

67

prevailed in the Mediterranean after the 1630s, is challenged by Molly Greene’s ‘Beyond the Northern Invasion: The Mediterranean in the Seventeenth Century’.45 Greene argues that the seventeenth-century Mediterranean is characterised by the lack of a state capable of imposing its policy (and thus economic dominance) and replacing the declining dominance of Venice in the Eastern Mediterranean. This power vacuum gave way to a state of anarchy, characterised by the prevalence of Christian and Muslim privateering. It is in this context that Greeks benefitted greatly from playing a dual role: on the one hand that of the Christians, supported by the Pope as long as they claimed allegiance with the Catholic Church under the agreement of the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438–9), and on the other that of the Ottomans, which allowed them to take on business on behalf of Muslim traders who were unable to cross the Mediterranean for fear of Maltese ships. Merchant Shipping: Greek Subjects of Venice in the Eighteenth Century In regard to the role of Greeks in international maritime trade, the eighteenth century, especially its second half, is a period with completely different characteristics to the past centuries (i.e. the sixteenth to the early eighteenth). Due to an increase in the volume of cargo transported, the population growth and the international situation (wars in Europe, especially after the Treaty of Passarowitz, the war of Austrian Succession from 1756–73), which reduced the presence of important European shippers on Eastern Mediterranean routes, the Greek shipping industry began preparing for its ‘big moment’. This development has been studied by historians, but not to the extent that would allow us to know the actual participation of Greeks in the Venetian fleet, as well as the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of this fleet. The first of the two questions could be addressed if we had full documentation of the identity of the owners of these Venetian ships. I had the opportunity to preliminarily address the second question, thanks to data provided by a joint survey of the most important ports in the Mediterranean, undertaken by the Amphitrete research programme coordinated by Gelina Harlaftis.46 The paper uses data collected from approximately 2,000 voyages from the Ionian Sea from 1700 to 1797: data found in ten archives across six different countries (located in the 2.3

45 46

Molly Greene, ‘Beyond the Northern Invasion: The Mediterranean in the Seventeenth Century’, Past and Present 174 (2002), 42–71. See more in Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping 1700–1821] (Athens: Kedros Publications, 2013). For more details, see Chapter 2 in this volume (G. Harlaftis).

68

Pagratis

cities of Marseille, Genoa, Florence, Messina, Venice, Trieste, Malta, Corfu, Istanbul, London). The study focused on the statistical variations in the fleets of the Greek subjects of Venice in relation to international economic and political conditions and emerging specialisations in areas of operation and transported goods.47 By examining commercial voyages of Greek subjects of Venice between 1700 and 1797, it became evident that the main growth of the fleet occurred between 1760 and 1797 and was aligned more or less with the beginning of an overall boom in Greek merchant shipping. The majority of the fleet belonged to the Ionians. This is partly because after the Treaty of Passarowitz in 1718, which confirmed the loss of Tinos and Morea for the Venetians, and until the dissolution of the Serenissima in 1797, Venetian territories in the Levant consisted of – with the exception of Dalmatia – the Ionian Islands and some small towns in Epirus (Butrinti, Saiada). Among the Ionian sea captains, the Cephalonians stood out – not surprisingly for those familiar with this period.48 With the exception of the European wars, the last third of the eighteenth century is associated with a number of cyclical and/or stable situations. While powers like Austria or Russia provided incentives to attract Greek shipping activity in their trading sphere, Venetian trade and economic policy remained fairly hostile towards the free participation of Greeks in foreign trade, even as Venice reached the final decades of its existence as a republic. This was reflected in the prohibition of the direct export of goods throughout territories without stopping first in Venice (where taxes would be levied), and also in measures related to convoys which burdened independent captains. Due to these factors, eighteenth-century Greek-Venetian subjects (essentially Ionians) began to use the Ottoman flag. At the same time, they began moving their businesses to neighbouring Ottoman ports such as Messolonghi and Etoliko.49 The main period of development for the commercial fleets of Greek subjects of Venice was in the last four decades of the eighteenth century. During this time, their trade covered much of the Mediterranean region. It also went beyond that: to the Black Sea, which accounted for a significant amount of trade activity, as well as to Alexandria, the Barbary Regencies and Marseille, Lisbon, London, Amsterdam and Hamburg. 47 48 49

Pagratis, ‘Shipping Enterprise in the Eighteenth Century’, 67–81. Pagratis, ‘Shipping Enterprise in the Eighteenth Century’. Francesco Grimani, Relazioni Storico-Politiche delle isole del Mare Jonio (Venice, 1856), 87. For shipping in Messolonghi, see Katerina Papakonstantinou, ‘The Port of Messolonghi: Spatial Allocation and Maritime Expansion in the Eighteenth Century’, The Historical Review / La Revue Historique 7 (2010), 277–97, along with the relevant literature.

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

69

As is obvious, from 1760 onwards there was an important increase in the activity of the Greek subjects of Venice, thanks to opportunities offered by the restriction of the French and English merchant fleets as well as to incentives provided by powers such as Russia and Austria. This temporal demarcation is not only defined by an increase in movement (in the later stages, the number of trips taken by the Greek subjects of Venice quadrupled compared to the previous sixty years); it is also the result of a reconfiguration of trading zones which extended beyond the Eastern Mediterranean region to include emerging ports in the Adriatic (Ancona, Trieste), the Central and Western Mediterranean (Malta, Barbaria, Spain) and the Atlantic (London, Amsterdam, Hamburg). This was also the century in which the Greeks bade farewell to Venice, a republic that embraced their shipping trade through difficult times and remained faithful to its trade policies which defined a glorious era for Venetian shipping. In the years of economic liberalism, Greeks living in Venetian territories did not expect Bonaparte to reach St Mark’s Square in May of 1797 and disband the Serenissima. Throughout the course of the century, four to five out of ten Greeks diligently avoided doing business in the Venetian state, while seven out of ten never tied up in the harbour of the capital. The call for further commercial gain led them elsewhere. From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism: the Septinsular Republic (1800–1807) The end of the Venetian Republic in 1797 inevitably changed the rules of conduct in maritime trade. Under what conditions did this happen? Who gained and lost privileges? And how can we quantitatively understand these developments? I attempt to answer these questions by examining whether, and under what circumstances, political changes occurred in the Ionian Islands after the overthrow of Venice in 1797 and to what extent they affected maritime entrepreneurship. I found the results quite interesting.50 After a brief French occupation, the Ionians formed a new state that was created thanks to Russian and Ottoman protection, under England’s support. Generally, it seems that the entrepreneurs of this new state imitated the Venetians. The flag hoisted at sea retained a chief characteristic of the Venetian iconography, the lion of St Mark; this made them appear to be heirs of the Venetian Republic. They also adopted Venetian customs in their new living conditions, business activities and political situations. This led to a fragile equilibrium between transitory allies that rarely maintained friendly relations. 2.4

50

Gerassimos D. Pagratis, ‘Shipping and Trade in the Ionian Islands’.

70

Map 3.1

Pagratis

The geography of the maritime trade of the Ionian State

The basic rules for the organisation and operation of merchant shipping were recorded in a law that borrowed liberally from an equivalent Venetian document from 1786 and made the Ionian entrepreneurs the islands’ dominant group, in contrast to what happened during the Venetian period. Ionian protectionism set strict conditions for granting the Ionian flag to fleets and mandated that ships should be staffed with native sailors. Furthermore, it was not friendly towards those who wished to register a ship constructed in places not politically aligned with the state and its protecting powers. For the first time in modern history, the Ionians were able to travel, having secured protection from the state as well as access to an established consular network built on the traces of an earlier Venetian network. Trade was conducted in the Mediterranean, with a preference towards the eastern basin – specifically towards the shoreline connecting the Black Sea and Istanbul to Crete, with connections through the Peloponnese towards countries originally producing goods as well as Italian ports. Upon observing Map 3.1, showing the Ionian fleet, one could assume that the conditions which led to the foundation of this island republic created a lasting bond between the Ionian captains and their future place of operation. But the most noteworthy link between the Ionian Islands and the Venetian past can be seen through the foreign perceptions of this island republic  – namely the perceptions of the Ottomans, whose territories were vital to Ionian

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

71

interests. Until 1797, the legal status of Venetian subjects who lived in the Ottoman Empire was determined by the capitulations ceded by the Sultan to the Doge. Through these treaties, the Venetians ensured relatively free passage throughout the Ottoman territories. Cases also existed of Venetians staying for long periods of time of their own free will; these were perceived by local authorities as rayahs. For over a decade after the dissolution of the Serenissima, former Venetian subjects in the Ottoman Empire took advantage of the privileges granted by imperial firmans. In essence, these were renewals of the terms of capitulation granted by the Sultan to the Venetians and Ionians, who were viewed by the Ottomans themselves as successors of the Serenissima in the Eastern Mediterranean. But as with these capitulations, imperial firmans did not apply to the whole population of a country. Just one year after the imperial diploma was signed, new criteria were adopted with regard to Ottoman tax farmers and officials, confirmed by the Porte through firmans which limited the number of people entitled to benefits. With these restrictions, these benefits ended up applying only to merchants and shipowners, with the logic that their families or relatives would continue to live on the Ionian Islands, a standard criterion for defining ‘Ionian nationality’ in that period.51 3

Epilogue

What has been said so far indicates a systematic approach towards formulating answers to key questions about the history of the shipping operations of the Greek subjects of Venice, but also about the fortunes of businesses established directly after the dissolution of the Serenissima, and the methodology applied to their study. There is, however, a range of questions that remain unanswered, despite the wealth of sources covered. Relying on all of these, we will attempt to formulate conclusions about what we know, as well as what we do not know yet. A prerequisite for writing a history of the shipping businesses of the Greek subjects of Venice is a quantitative and qualitative understanding of the means used in this endeavour. That is to say, fleets, crews, captains, social status and income, cargoes transported, shipping routes and types of ships. We must take 51

Gerassimos D. Pagratis, ‘Lo status giuridico degli ex sudditi Veneti nell’Impero Ottomano tra la fine del Settecento e il primo decennio successivo al crollo della Serenissima’ in Cristian Luca and Gianluca Masi (eds), La storia di un ri-conoscimento: i rapporti tra l’Europa Centro-Orientale e la Penisola italiana dal Rinascimento all’Età dei Lumi (Braila-Udine: Campanotto Editore, 2012), 411–29.

72

Pagratis

into account the geographical distribution of shipping, or rather local shipping centres, as well as their conditions of operation. Of these various places, we know Corfu in the first half of the sixteenth century well. There has not been any systematic investigation on the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the fleets and the operation of commercial and shipping centres in other Venetian territories, such as Zakynthos of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Lefkada of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and Crete until its conquest by the Ottomans in 1669. Despite the lack of research, the necessary data have survived. Focused studies on the social profiles of these shipping businesses that could help to formulate a typology of them are also lacking.52 It has also become clear that the probe of the evolution of the shipping businesses for the Greek subjects of Venice requires the use of theoretical frameworks  – be they simple or complex  – familiarity with international historiography, and a bit more ‘fuel’ to acquire an explanatory power. These interpretations assume an explanation in Maritime History that relies first and foremost on the ship. That is to say, the ship as a multi-person business unit, organised around various social relations that use the sea for trade, transport, political power, entertainment, and so on. So what remains is to analyse shipping enterprises bit-by-bit, to gather databases similar to Amphitrite, to join all the features related to the organisation and actions of these companies, to identify the people involved in the social and economic dimensions of shipping – all of which again leads us back to archival material. Bibliography Birtachas Stathis, ‘Un “secondo” vescovo a Venezia: il metropolita di Filadelfia (secoli XVI–XVIII)’ in Maria Francesca Tiepolo and Eurigio Tonetti (eds), I Greci a Venezia (Venice: Istituto Veneto di Scienze, 2002), 103–21. Di Vittorio Antonio and Carlos B. López (eds), La Storiografia Marittima in Italia e in Spagna in età moderna e contemporanea. Tendenze, orientamenti, linee evolutive (Bari: Cacucci Editore, 2001). Fusaro Maria, ‘Coping with Transition: Greek Merchants and Shipowners between Venice and England in the Late Sixteenth Century’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis, Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (Oxford and New York: Berg, 2005), 95–123.

52

Pagratis, ‘Προσωπογραφικό λεξικό της Κέρκυρας: 16ος αιώνας’ [Prosopographical Dictionary of Corfu: The 16th Century], Εώα και Εσπέρια [Eoa kai Esperia] 5 (2006), 123–31.

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

73

Fusaro Maria, ‘Les Anglais et le Grecs. Un réseau de cooperation commerciale en Méditerranée vénitienne’, Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 58/3 (2003), 605–25. Fusaro Maria, ‘Commercial Networks in the Early Modern World’ in Diogo Ramada Curto and Anthony Molho (eds), EUI Working Paper, HEC, no. 2 (Florence: European University Institute, 2002), 121–47. Gluzman Renard, ‘What Makes a Ship Venetian? (13th–16th Centuries)’ in Georg Christ and Franz-Julius Morche (eds), Cultures of Empire: Rethinking Venetian Rule 1400–1700. A Festschrift for Benjamin Arbel, The Medieval Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill, 2020), 8–311. Gluzman Renard, ‘Notes on Venice’s Ship-breaking Industry and the Scrap Market in the Sixteenth Century’, Journal of European Economic History 2 (September 2018), 83–95. Gluzman Renard, ‘Between Venice and the Levant: Re-evaluating Maritime Routes from the Fourteenth to the Sixteenth Century’, The Mariner’s Mirror 96/3 (August 2010), 262–92. Greene Molly, Catholic Pirates and Greek Merchants: A History of the Mediterranean in the Age of Piracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010). Greene Molly, ‘Trading Identities: The Sixteenth Century Greek Moment’ in Adnan A. Husain and K.E. Fleming (eds), A Faithful Sea: The Religious Cultures of the Mediterranean, 1200–1700 (Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2007), 121–48. Greene Molly, ‘Beyond the Northern Invasion: The Mediterranean in the Seventeenth Century’, Past and Present 174 (2002), 42–71. Grimani Francesco, Relazioni Storico-Politiche delle isole del Mare Jonio (Venice, 1856). Harlaftis Gelina and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping 1700–1821] (Athens: Kedros Publications, 2013). Harlaftis Gelina, History of the Greek-owned Fleets of the 19th and 20th Centuries (Athens: Alexandria, 2001). Hassiotis Ioannis, ‘Venezia e i domini veneziani tramite di informazioni sui Turchi per gli Spagnoli nel sec. XVI’ in Hans-Georg Beck, Manoussos Manoussacas, Agostino Pertusi (eds), Venezia, Centro di Mediazione tra Est ed Ovest (secoli XV–XVI). Aspetti e problemi, vol. 1 (Florence: Olschki Editore, 1977), 117–36. Hassiotis Ioannis, Οι Έλληνες στις παραμονες της ναυμαχίας της Ναυπάκτου [The Greeks on the Eve of the Battle of Lepanto] (Thessaloniki, 1970). Hassiotis Ioannis, Σχέσεις Ελλήνων και Ισπανών στην Τουρκοκρατία [Relationships Between Greeks and Spaniards During the Turkish Occupation] (Athens: n.p., 1968). Lane Frederic, ‘Venetian Shipping During the Commercial Revolution’ in Brian Pullan (ed.), Crisis and Change in the Venetian Economy in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (London: Methuen, 1968), 22–46 (originally reprinted in American Historical Review 38 [1933], 219–39.

74

Pagratis

Mavroidi Fani, ‘Οι Σέρβοι και η Ελληνική Αδελφότητα της Βενετίας’ [The Serbs and the Greek Brotherhood of Venice], Balkan Studies 24/2 (1983), 511–29. Mavroidi Fani, Συμβολή στην ιστορία της ελληνικής αδελφότητας Βενετίας στο ΙΣΤ’ αιώνα [Contribution to the History of the Greek Brotherhood of Venice in the XVI Century. Registry Records II (1533–1562)] (Athens: n.p., 1976). Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Entrepreneurship and Social and Political Power in the Ionian Islands from the Late 16th to the First Decades of the 17th Century: Some CaseStudies from Venetian-ruled Corfu’ in Cristian Luca, Laurentiu Radvan and Alexandru Simon (eds), Social and Political Elites in Eastern and Central Europe (15th–18th Centuries) (London: School of Slavonic and East European Studies, 2015), 109–20. Pagratis Gerassimos D., Κοινωνία και Οικονομία στο βενετικό Κράτος της Θάλασσας: Οι ναυτιλιακές επιχειρήσεις της Κέρκυρας (1496–1538) [Society and Economy in the Venetian ‘Stato da Mar’: The Shipping Enterprises of Corfu (1496–1538)] (Athens: Pedio, 2013), 113–49. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Venice, the Sea and the Greeks: The Maritime Policy of the Venetian State and the Entrepreneurial Activities of the Greek Subjects During the 16th Century’ in Ruthy Gertwagen and Jean Claude Hocquet (eds), Venice and the Mediterranean (XIII–XVIII centuries), Studi Veneziani 67 (2013), 253–66. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Shipping and Trade in the Ionian Islands: The Merchant Fleet of the Septinsular Republic (1800–1807)’, Journal of the Oxford University Historical Society 8 (Hilary, 2012). Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Lo status giuridico degli ex sudditi Veneti nell’Impero Ottomano tra la fine del Settecento e il primo decennio successivo al crollo della Serenissima’ in Cristian Luca and Gianluca Masi (eds), La storia di un ri-conoscimento: i rapporti tra l’Europa Centro-Orientale e la Penisola italiana dal Rinascimento all’Età dei Lumi (Braila-Udine: Campanotto Editore, 2012), 411–29. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Οι απαρχές της παρουσίας των Ισπανών στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο μετά τις γεωγραφικές ανακαλύψεις: το προξενείο του αυθέντη ρηγός της Ισπανίας στη βενετοκρατούμενη Κέρκυρα (1515)’ [The Origins of Spanish Presence in the Eastern Mediterranean After the Geographical Discoveries: The Consulate of Spain in Venetian Corfu (1515)], Κερκυραϊκά Χρονικά [Kerkyraika Chronica] 6 (2012), 235–45. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Jews in Corfu’s Economy (From the Late-Fifteenth to Midsixteenth Century)’, Mediterranean Historical Review 27/2 (2012), 189–98. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Ships and Shipbuilding in Corfu in the First Half of the Sixteenth Century’, Mediterranea. Rivista di Studi Storici 22 (2011), 237–46. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Shipping Enterprise in the Eighteenth Century: The Case of the Greek Subjects of Venice’, Mediterranean Historical Review 25/1 (2010), 67–81. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Προσωπογραφικό λεξικό της Κέρκυρας: 16ος αιώνας’ [Prosopographical Dictionary of Corfu: The 16th Century], Εώα και Εσπέρια [Eoa kai Esperia] 5 (2006), 123–31.

From Venetian to Ionian Protectionism

75

Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Sources for the Maritime History of Greece (Fifteenth to Seventeenth Centuries)’ in Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassallo (eds), New Directions in Mediterranean Maritime History, Research in Maritime History, no. 28 (St. John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2004), 125–46. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Greek Commercial Shipping (Fifteenth to Seventeenth Centuries): Literature Review and Research Perspectives’, Journal of Mediterranean Studies 12/2 (2002), 411–33. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Το κονσουλάτον των Μυτιληναίων στην Κέρκυρα (1548–1549)’ [The Consulate of Mytilene in Venetian Corfu (1548–1549)], Εώα και Εσπέρια [Eoa kai Esperia] 4 (2000), 22–45. Panagiotopoulou Krista, ‘Έλληνες ναυτικοί και πλοιοκτήτες από τα παλαιότερα οικονομικά κατάστιχα της Ελληνικής Αδελφότητας Βενετίας’ [Greek Shipowners and Sailors from the Oldest Financial Books of the Greek Brotherhood of Venice], Θησαυρίσματα [Thesaurismata] 11 (1974), 308–28. Papakonstantinou Katerina, ‘The Port of Messolonghi: Spatial Allocation and Maritime Expansion in the Eighteenth Century’, The Historical Review / La Revue Historique 7 (2010), 277–97. Ploumidis George S., Οι Βενετοκρατούμενες Ελληνικές χώρες μεταξύ του δεύτερου και του τρίτου Τουρκο-βενετικού πολέμου (1503–1537) [Venetian-held Greek Countries Between the Second and Third Turco-Venetian War (1503–1537)] (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 1974). Ravid Benjamin, ‘A Tale of Three Cities and Their Raison d’Etat: Ancona, Venice, Livorno and the Competition for Jewish Merchants in the Sixteenth Century’ in Alisa Meyuhas Ginio (ed.), Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Mediterranean World After 1492 (London: Routledge, 1992), 138–62. Stella Aldo, ‘La crisi economica veneziana nella seconda metà del secolo XVI’, Archivio Veneto 93–94 (1956), 17–69. Tucci Ugo, ‘I Greci nella vita marittima veneziana’ in Maria Francesca Tiepolo & Eurigio Tonetti (eds), I Greci a Venezia (Venice: Istituto veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti, 2002), 243–55. Tucci Ugo, ‘La Storiografia Marittima sulla Repubblica di Venezia’ in A. Di Vittorio (ed.), Tendenze e orientamenti nella storiografia marittima contemporanea (Naples, 1986), 151–73. Tucci Ugo, ‘La psicologia del mercante veneziano nel Cinquecento’, in Navi, mercanti, monete nel Cinquecento veneziano (Bologna, 1981), 43–94. Tucci Ugo, ‘La marina mercantile veneziana nel Settecento’, Bollettino dell’Istituto di Storia della Società e dello Stato Veneziano 2 (1960), 155–209.

Chapter 4

Caught Between Empires: Agency, Neutrality and a Middleman Minority Katerina Galani During the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the Greeks were engaged in coastal shipping as well as long-distance trade across the Mediterranean and the Black Sea and beyond Gibraltar, towards the Atlantic or the Indian Ocean. The size of the fleet and the scope of its activity in local and peripheral markets, along with its integration in global trade and shipping networks, reached an unprecedented level. This was the outcome of a long evolutionary process that culminated in the second half of the eighteenth century.1 If the sixteenth century was characterised by religious polarisation in the Mediterranean between the Christians and Muslims, and the seventeenth century by an early collision among fledging states over political and economic dominance, the eighteenth century was grounded in large-scale political and economic conflicts. At the same time, the significance of divergence in religion and culture was gradually fading. The invasion and establishment of Northerners, primarily English and Dutch merchants, had reshuffled the cards and disrupted the equilibrium in the region by expanding the number of contenders in the Mediterranean market.2 The gradual development of a traditional seafaring population into a specialised seaborne carrier and the transformation of a local fleet into a peripheral and international actor was spurred by war and international competition. The paper addresses this seminal transformation by placing emphasis on the fluid economic and political state of affairs in the Eastern Mediterranean that bred the economic emancipation of Greek populations under foreign rule and paved the way for their political emancipation. The Greeks evolved 1 Gelina Harlaftis and Κaterina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821] (Athens: Kedros, 2013); Evrydiki Sifneos and Gelina Harlaftis (eds), Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής, 18ος–αρχες 20ου αιώνα. Νέες προσεγγίσεις στην Ιστορία των Ελλήνων της Νότιας Ρωσίας [Greeks in the Azov 18th–Beginning of 20th Century: New Approaches in the History of the Greeks in South Russia], (Athens: National Research Foundation, Institute of Historical Research, 2015). 2 Molly Greene, ‘Beyond the Northern Invasion: The Mediterranean in the Seventeenth Century’, Past and Present 174/1 (2002), 42–71.

© Katerina Galani, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_005

Caught Between Empires

77

from a minority of middlemen across the powerful empires of the early modern period into a powerful economic player in shipping and trade. In reality, this development had a bilateral transformational impact: on the Greeks, be they individual traders and maritime communities, and on the surrounding empires with which they interacted. In the second decade of the nineteenth century, the Greeks proclaimed their independence from the Ottomans and founded their sovereign state through fire, sword and international politics. Braudel, Horden and Purcell and, lately, Harlaftis, relating the history of the Mediterranean, have stressed the importance of sea routes, of networks and micro-regions, and of transport systems, respectively, in order to define the connectivity among regions and economies within the Mediterranean.3 Each one of these formative notions is a useful tool for reflecting on maritime activity and on the cohesion of the otherwise fragmented Mediterranean and its convergence with global markets. Recently, Miller underscored in a refreshing and challenging way the importance of human resources – aside from infrastructure and networks – in the economic development of Europe and the process of globalisation.4 The integration of regional societies and economies through an international network of trade transformed mentalities and everyday practices. An essential role in the process is ascribed to agents and intermediaries, who are the indispensable cogs in the shipping and trade machine.5 True citizens of the world with multiple and intertwined identities, they were the nodes of the networks, home-based and expatriated: men who learned their trade from the bottom up, who developed expertise in commodities and markets, who moved along the different levels of networks, converging the local with the global. The significance of mediators in shipping remained unchanged in 3 Fernand Braudel, La Méditerranée et le Monde méditerranéen à l’ époque de Philippe II (Paris: Armand Colin, 1966); Peregrine Horden and Nicholas Purcell, The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2000), 90–113; see Chapter 2 in this volume (G. Harlaftis). 4 Michael B. Miller, Europe and the Maritime World: A Twentieth-century History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 146–75. See also Tijl Vanneste, Global Trade and Commercial Networks: Eighteenth-century Diamond Merchants (London: Pickering & Chatto, 2011), 149–50, 161–81 on the role of human agency in global commercial activities. 5 The notions of ‘intermediaries’, ‘go-betweens’ and middlemen and their role in colonial and global history have been discussed extensively in the literature. For a recent discussion of the terms and their reappraisal, see Alida Metcalf, Go-Betweens and the Colonization of Brazil (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2006); E. Natalie Rothman, Brokering Empire: Trans-imperial Subjects between Venice and Istanbul (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2012), where the author stresses the formulative power of intermediaries on societies; Dirk Hoerder, ‘Global Migrations’ in J. Bentley (ed.), The Cambridge World History VI: The Construction of a Global World 1400–1800, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 3–28.

78

Galani

the following centuries, as they provided essential services and coordination between sectors in an industry highly dependent on personal relations. The proliferation and intensification of seaborne communication in the late eighteenth century had ushered in economic and social integration to a degree never before attained in the Mediterranean. Greeks were a typical example of intermediaries, who connected the Eastern Mediterranean with the overseas markets. They started out as local agents for foreign traders and evolved into self-standing, transnational economic actors – that is, merchants, bankers and shipowners – who formed a broad diasporic business network and nurtured the economic development of Greece in the following centuries.6 To decipher the Greek paradigm in the eighteenth century, we must reflect on their strategy of neutrality and mediation amid conflicting interests. On the one hand, competing Europeans sought local allies and agents in the Levant to trade in a hostile environment and relied on the assistance of ethno-religious minorities, predominantly Greeks, Armenians and Jews. On the other hand, the Ottoman Empire actively promoted non-Muslim traders in an attempt to curtail the ever-growing infiltration of foreigners.7 On the fringes of the Ottoman Empire, in the Ionian Sea, the Republic of Venice had practised a strict policy of protectionism which had suppressed the maritime activity of the Venetian subjects. However, in the course of the eighteenth century, the waning state had lost the ability to enforce its official policies and in practice the Ionian Islanders conducted trade outside the republic, evading the high customs of the port of Venice.8 With the advent of the nineteenth century, the 6 Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Galani, ‘Maritime Migrations of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea’ in Catia Antunes and Eric Tagliacozzo (eds), The Cambridge History of Global Migrations, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming); Olga Katsiardi-Hering and Maria A. Stassinopoulou, ‘Introduction’, Katsiardi-Hering and Stassinopoulou (eds), Across the Danube: Southeastern Europeans and their Travelling Identities (17th–19th C.) (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2017); Gelina Harlaftis and Ioannis Theotokas, Leadership in World Shipping: Greek Family Firms in International Business (London: Palgrave/ Macmillan, 2009); Gelina Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping: The Making of an International Tramp Fleet, 1830 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 1996). 7 Gelina Harlaftis and Sophia Laiou, ‘Ottoman State Policy in Mediterranean Trade and Shipping, c.1780–1820: The Rise of the Greek-owned Ottoman Merchant Fleet’ in Mark Mazower (ed.), Networks of Power in Modern Greece (London: Hurst & Co., 2008), 1–44; Elena Frangakis-Syrett, ‘The Coastal Trade of the Ottoman Empire, from the Mid-eighteenth to the Early Nineteenth Centuries’ in John Armstrong-Andreas Kunz (eds) Coastal Shipping and the European Economy, 1750–1980 (Mainz-am-Rhein: Frank Cass & Co, 2002), 131–49. 8 Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘Η ναυτιλιακή επιχείρηση τoν 18ο αιώνα: Η περίπτωση των Ελλήνων υπηκόων της Βενετίας’ [The Shipping Business in the Eighteenth Century: The Case of the Greek Subjects of Venice] in Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou (eds), Η Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 457–66; G. Pagratis, ‘The Ottoman Empire and the Ionian Maritime Enterprises in the Late 18th and

Caught Between Empires

79

Ionian Islands were detached from Venice and placed under British protection, thus assuming the role of the local carrier for the British Empire.9 In this process, merchants were the bearers of political and economic change, promoting liberalism. The turn of the nineteenth century was marked by the repeal of mercantilism: the abolition of monopolies, the dissolution of chartered companies and the prevalence of free trade. A closer look at the history of the British Levant Company will demonstrate how Greeks, along with other traders, non-members of the Company, became its Trojan horse, undermining its monopoly in the Ottoman Empire long before its official revocation, by circumventing traditional trade routes and introducing free trade under the pressure of the Anglo-French wars.10 From the political side, the economic emancipation of Greek merchants led to the Greek War of Independence and forged a small yet sovereign state, despite the conservative European milieu. The first Greek constitution (1822), deeply liberal and democratic, was inspired by the French Revolution and the American Declaration of Independence and triggered a series of revolutionary movements in the Balkans during the 1870s (e.g. Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro, Romania).11 The aim of this chapter is to probe the conditions that fostered the economic development of the Greeks, taking into consideration the historical conjuncture in the Mediterranean. The proper strength of Greek maritime activity lay, at its core, in the business know-how acquired by the means of agency and mediation, the status of neutrality in the European intermittent wars and, lastly, the ability to shift legal authorities to pursue their best interest. Greeks found themselves in a field where different political and economic actors intertwined and where overlapping authorities collided. They Early 19th Centuries’ in Edhem Eldem and Sophia Laiou (eds), Istanbul and the Black Sea Coast: Trade and Shipping (1770–1820) (Istanbul: Isis, 2018), 27–33. 9 During the French Wars, the islands went through a few troublesome years, with alternating French, Russian and Ottoman occupations. For a few years (1800–1807), they became independent under the name ‘The Septinsular Republic’, due to a diplomatic agreement between Russia and the Ottoman Empire. At the end of the Napoleonic Wars, they were declared as the ‘Ionian State’ and placed under the protection of Britain until 1864, when they were ceded to the Greek kingdom. 10 Katerina Galani, British Shipping in the Mediterranean During the Napoleonic Wars: The Untold Story of a Successful Adaptation (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2017), 190–223. 11 Petros Pizanias, The Greek Revolution of 1821: A European Event (Istanbul: Isis, 2011); Moises Enrique Rodriguez, Under the Flags of Freedom: British Mercenaries in the War of the Two Brothers, the First Carlist War and the Greek War of Independence (1821–1840) (Lanham: University Press of America, 2009); Thomas Gallant, Modern Greece: From the War of Independence to the Present (New York: Bloomsbury, 2016), 83–98. Mark Mazower, The Greek Revolution (New York: Penguin Press, 2021).

80

Galani

assumed a number of different identities as they were divided among competing empires – Ottoman, Habsburg, Venetian, Russian and British – which all had political and economic aspirations for the Mediterranean. Rather than resulting in mayhem, complexity and ambiguity were in fact an advantageous condition; Greeks moved through the cracks of the system, swaying between different political powers, indulging a status of protection from either side, swapping passes and official documents according to the occasion, carrying a number of different flags.12 The consolidation of a fleet, the expansion to Western markets, the diffusion of a diasporic network of merchant communities in major ports and cities and, finally, the preparation of a national uprising were the fruits borne by their successful adaptation to the fluid conditions of the eighteenth century.13 1

The Rise of Greek Shipping: the Facts

Drawing upon extensive research conducted over the last decades, Greeks under Ottoman, Venetian or British rule had created a unified, interconnected business group embedded in common ethno-cultural features, religion and language, despite the absence of a Greek sovereign state.14 In fact, in the ­eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries we witness the establishment of what has been described as ‘a dispersed city’ in the Aegean and the Ionian seas, where common business practices and intertwined networks existed, allowing for the unhindered circulation of products, resources, information and human capital among the Greek populations.15 This Greek business cluster, beyond 12

13

14

15

Pagratis, ‘Η ναυτιλιακή επιχείρηση τον 18ο αιώνα’, 455–6. Pagratis refers to the Ionians flying a total of six flags in the eighteenth century, alternating upon the port of call to avoid heavy customs. Furthermore, for documented incidents of shifting identities, see Maurits van den Boogert, ‘Ottoman Greeks in the Dutch Levant Trade: Collective Strategy and Individual Practice (c. 1750–1821)’, Oriente Moderno 86/1 (2006), 129–47. Katerina Galani ‘The Greek Community in London in the 19th Century: A Socioeconomic Approach’, Ιστορικά 63 (2016), 43–68 (in Greek); Katerina Galani, ‘Galata Bankers and the International Banking of the Greek Business Group in the 19th Century’ in Eldem and Laiou (eds), Istanbul and the Black Sea Coast, 49–76. See Introduction and Chapter 2 (G. Harlaftis) in this volume. On business groups, see Mark Granovetter, ‘Coase Revisited: Business Groups in the Modern Economy’, Industrial and Corporate Change 4/1 (1995), 93–130; Asli M. Colpan, Takashi Hikino and James R. Lincoln (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Business Groups (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 1–14, 67–96. Mauro Guillen, ‘Business Groups in Emerging Economies: A Resource-based View’, The Academy of Management Journal 43/3 (2000), 3–62. Spyros Asdrachas, ‘Το ελληνικό Αρχιπέλαγος μία διάσπαρτη πόλη’ [Greek Archipelago: A Dispersed City] in Χάρτες και χαρτογράφοι του Αιγαίου Πελάγους [Maps and Cartographers of

Caught Between Empires

81

political borders, was endowed with a competitive advantage, as it drastically reduced transaction cost, relayed information and transferred credit and human resources. In the absence of coordination by one central political authority, the rise of Greek shipping in the eighteenth and nineteenth century was not concentrated on maritime centres or port cities. On the contrary, it sprang from a constellation of more than thirty-eight islands, maritime communities and loading sites along the coastline of contemporary Greece and Asia Minor, all in the Aegean and the Ionian seas. A body of 18,000 able seamen and 1,800 merchant houses linked by family ties represented the labour force and the maritime businesses, respectively.16 Since the early eighteenth century, the Greek-owned fleet had grown steadily, and at the turn of the nineteenth century it comprised approximately 1,000 ships of 120,000 tons.17 Such a sizeable fleet, manned by a large and experienced body of mariners, expanded from the domestic trade of the Adriatic and the Levant to a wider Mediterranean market, and even further, to the Black Sea and the Atlantic, reaching ports as far-off as Latin America and India.18 Warfare and neutrality played a significant role in the volatile business of shipping and trade. In the turbulent years of the late eighteenth century, while some players were expelled from the Mediterranean, some others profited from the uncertainty and expanded their share of the market. The French and Napoleonic Wars introduced economic warfare in the form of embargoes, implemented through Napoleon’s Continental Blockade in 1806 and the British counter-measures by the Orders in Council of 1807, which targeted the enemy’s political and economic infrastructure.19 Within the system of mercantilism,

16

17 18

19

the Aegean] (Athens: Olkos, 1985), 235–48. On the links between the Ionian Islands and the adjacent Greek coastline, Pagratis, ‘The Ottoman Empire and the Ionian Maritime Enterprises’, 27–29. Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η “ναυτική πολιτεία” του Ιονίου και του Αιγαίου. Ναυτότοποι, ναυτικές οικογένειες και επιχειρήσεις’ [The ‘Maritime City’ of the Aegean and the Ionian: Maritime Communities, Families and Enterprises] in Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou (eds), Η Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 353–405. Harlaftis, ‘Η “ναυτική πολιτεία” του Ιονίου’, 407–43. Eloy Martín-Coralles, ‘Greek-Ottoman Captains in the Service of the Spanish Commerce in the Late 18th Century’ in Maria Fusaro, Colin Heywood and Mohamed Salah Omri (eds), Trade and Cultural Exchange in the Early Modern Mediterranean (London: IB Tauris, 2010), 203–22. Katherine B. Aaslestad and Johan Joor (eds), Revisiting Napoleon’s Continental System (London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2015), 1–24; Lance E. Davis and Stanley L. Engerman, Naval Blockades in Peace and War: An Economic History Since 1750 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 25–52.

82

Galani

the objective was not the drain of the opponent’s domestic market but the constriction of exports, which affected the enemy’s industrial output and the distribution of its colonial produce.20 Over recent years, the impact of neutrality has been exalted in the literature and it has been considered a competitive advantage, particularly for small players, enabling them to outdo other contenders.21 On a state level, the Danes and the Swedes are the most representative and well-documented examples.22 They transported primarily Baltic products to the Mediterranean and acted as carriers for others, especially the warring states, reaping long-term economic benefits. At the turn of the nineteenth century, the Americans, also neutral carriers, expanded their maritime activity in Southern Europe; they created or reinforced existing networks of trade with ports traditionally involved in the Atlantic trade, such as Livorno, Bordeaux and Smyrna.23 The case study 20 21

22

23

Kevin O’Rourke, ‘The Worldwide Economic Impact of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, 1793–1815’, Discussion Paper Series, Centre for Economic Policy Research, no. 5079 (May 2005), 5–6. Jari Eloranta et al. (eds), Small and Medium Powers in Global History: Trade, Conflicts and Neutrality from the 18th to the 20th Centuries (Abingdon: Routledge, 2019); Antonella Alimento (ed.), War, Trade and Neutrality (Milan: Franco Angeli, 2011); Koen Stapelbroek (ed.), Trade and War: The Neutrality of Commerce in the Inter-state System, Collegium, vol. 10 (Helsinki: University of Helsinki, 2011); Silvia Marzagalli and Leos Müller, ‘“In Apparent Disagreement with All Law of Nations in the World”: Negotiating Neutrality for Shipping and Trade During the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars’, 108–17; Pierre-Yves Beaurepaire, ‘“No Law Ever Prohibited Neutral Caravans in Time of War”: The Fragility of Neutral Shipping in the Late Eighteenth-century Mediterranean’, 180–92; Pierrick Pourchasse, ‘Danish Shipping in the Mediterranean During the Revolutionary Wars’, 165–79 – all in International Journal of Maritime History 28/1 (2016). Silvia Marzagalli, ‘American Shipping and Trade in Warfare, or the Benefits of European Conflicts for Neutral Merchants: The Experience of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, 1793–1815’, Kyoto Sangyo University Economic Review 1 (March 2014), 1–29. Dan Andersen and Hans Joachim Voth, ‘The Grapes of War: Neutrality and Mediterranean Shipping under the Danish flag, 1747–1807’, Scandinavian Economic History Review 48/1 (2000), 5–27; Ole Feldbæk, ‘Eighteenth-century Danish Neutrality: Its Diplomacy, Economics and Law’, Scandinavian Journal of History 8 (1983), 3–21; Hans C. Johansen, ‘Scandinavian Shipping in the Late Eighteenth Century in a European Perspective’, The Economic History Review 45/3 (1992); Mikael af Malmborg, Neutrality and State-building in Sweden (Basingstoke: Houndmills, 2001); Leos Müller, Consuls, Corsairs, and Commerce: The Swedish Consular Service and Long-Distance Shipping, 1720–1815 (Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2004); Leos Müller, ‘Swedish Merchant Shipping in Troubled Times: The French Revolutionary Wars and Sweden’s Neutrality’, International Journal of Maritime History 28/1 (2016), 147–64. Silvia Marzagalli, ‘Establishing Transatlantic Trade Networks in Time of War: Bordeaux and the United States, 1793–1815’, Business History Review 79/4 (2005), 811–44. Silvia Marzagalli, ‘American Shipping into the Mediterranean During the French Wars: A First

Caught Between Empires

83

of Livorno, one of the most important hubs, is indicative of the extent of the American involvement, as it is captured by port traffic estimated through the sanitary records. For a few consecutive years during the Napoleonic Wars, American entries at the Tuscan port rose considerably and displaced the previously pronounced British presence.24 Neutrality was not only a privilege of external carriers who sailed in the Mediterranean. In the eighteenth century, local players also indulged its premium and they emerged to fill the gap incurred by the belligerent powers. The Greek paradigm in the last decades has been systematically studied, drawing upon an array of archival sources and combining both quantitative and qualitative interpretations.25 In the age of consecutive wars in the Mediterranean, the status of neutrality protected Greek vessels from the perils at sea.26 There were also sheer economic benefits: as neutrals, they could serve the belligerent parties and undertake shipping and trade on their behalf. As we will see below, this has been the case particularly for the British trade, which deployed the Ionian Islanders as well as the Greeks of the Ottoman Empire. Greek-owned ships sailing in dangerous waters were protected by the use of the Greco-Ottoman flag. Contrary to a long-standing literature that proclaimed a pervasive use of the Russian flag as a flag of convenience and protection for the Greeks, recent research concurs on the prevalence of the Ottoman flag.27

24

25 26

27

Approach’ in Silvia Marzagalli, James Sofka and John McCusker (eds), Rough Waters: American Involvement with the Mediterranean in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Research in Maritime History, no. 44 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2010), 43–62. Archivio di Stato di Livorno (ASL), Magistrato poi Dipartimento di Sanità marittima. Deliberazioni di Sanità e paperi di Contumacia, F. 621–6, 696–705; for an analysis of the data, see Katerina Galani, ‘The Napoleonic Wars and the Disruption of Mediterranean Trade; British and Greek Merchants in Livorno’, The Historical Review/La Revue Historique, vol. 7 (2010), 179–98. On a different aspect of American presence in the Mediterranean, see Timothy Roberts, ‘Commercial Philanthropy: American Missionaries and the American Opium Trade in Izmir During the First Part of the Nineteenth Century’, Journal of Mediterranean Studies 19/2 (2010), 371–88. For the archival sources used, see Introduction and Chapter 2 (G. Harlaftis) in this volume. Gonçal Lopèz Nadal, ‘Mediterranean Privateering between the Treaties of Utrecht and Paris, 1715–1856: First Reflexions’ in David Starkey, E.S. Van d’Eyck van Heslinga, Jaap de Moor (eds), Pirates and Privateers: New Perspectives on the War on Trade in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1997). Konstantinos Paparigopoulos, Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Έθνους [History of the Greek Nation], vol. 1 (Athens: Ekdotiki 1952), 560; Spyridon Lambrou, Επισκόπησις της Ελληνικής Ιστορίας [Overview of Greek History] (Athens, 1927), 36; Apostolos Vakalopoulos, Ιστορία Νέου Ελληνισμού [Modern Greek History], vol. 4 (Thessaloniki, 1973), 472; Vassilis Sfyroeras, ‘Τα νησιά του Αιγαίου’ in Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Εθνους [‘The Aegean Islands’ in The History of the Greek Nation], vol. 9 (Athens, 1975), 218–30; George Dertylis, Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Κράτους, 1830–1920 [History of the Greek State, 1830–1920] (Athens, 2005), 196. For the revisionist

84

Galani

Throughout the eighteenth century, approximately 80% of the Greek-owned ships trading in the major Mediterranean hubs such as Malta, Livorno and Genoa preferred the Ottoman flag, followed by the Russian and the Ionian. In the Ionian Islands, the Venetian flag was used by the vast majority of the fleet in the eighteenth century to secure protection from the Barbary corsairs and unhindered passages during the Wars of the Austrian Succession (1736– 48), the Seven-Year War (1756–73) and later on during the Russian-Ottoman and French wars.28 Once the Ionian Islands were detached from the Venetian Republic, they used largely their own flag, which was considered neutral and was consistently preferred over the Russian.29 Both the transient Septinsular Republic (1800–1807) and the succeeding Ionian State featured on their flags the Venetian Lion, in reminiscence of their past.30 In practice, due to their neutral flag, Greek ships were not attacked by the privateers of the warring states, and they were also immune to the raids of the Barbary corsairs.31 The African Regencies owed allegiance to the Sublime Porte and, provided that they had secured alternative prey, did not attack Ottoman vessels. The protection against the Barbary corsairs extended even to Ionian ships of the Septinsular Republic, which indulged the protection of the Sublime Port as well.32 This was a significant comparative advantage for the Greeks, while the European States strove to secure protection from the pirates. Protection came in the form of Mediterranean passes, which were granted as a result of the peace treaties between European powers and the Barbary States.33

28 29 30 31

32 33

approach, see G. Halaftis, Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821] (Athens: Kedros Publications, 2013), 778–81. Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘Η Ναυτιλιακή Επιχείρηση τον 18ο αιώνα’, 453–4. Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η εισβολή της ναυτιλίας των “Γραικών” στο μεγάλο εμπόριο της Μεσογείου, 1714–1815’ [The Invasion of the ‘Greci’ in Long-distance Trade in the Mediterranean], Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou (eds), Η Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 280–3. Gerassimos Pagratis, ‘Shipping and Trade in the Ionian Islands: The Merchant Fleet of the Septinsular Republic (1800–1807)’, Journal of the Oxford University Historical Society 8 (Hilary, 2012), www.ouhs.org. Peter Earle, Corsairs of Malta and Barbary (London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1970); Robert C. Davis, Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, The Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500–1800 (New York: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2003); Frederick Leiner, The End of Barbary Terror: America’s 1815 War Against the Pirates of North Africa (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). Pagratis, ‘The Ottoman Empire and the Ionian Maritime Enterprises’, 31. Katerina Galani, ‘British Shipping and Trade in the Mediterranean in the Age of War, 1770–1815’ (Doctoral thesis, University of Oxford, 2011), 151–4; Joseph Chitty, A Treatise on the Laws of Commerce and Manufactures and the Contracts Relating Thereto (A. Strahan, 1824), 495–97; Tito Benady, ‘The Settee Cut: The Mediterranean Passes Issued at Gibraltar’, The Mariner’s Mirror 87/3 (2001), 281–96; Leos Müller, Consuls, Corsairs, and Commerce.

Caught Between Empires

85

The transformation of the Greek-owned fleet into a peripheral and international carrier may have been precipitated by the outbreak of the French and Napoleonic Wars, but it was rooted in the tacit knowledge of shipping and trading in the Mediterranean. The latter was accumulated over time, on a local scale, through the close observation of Western merchants and their practices, and the participation in their business networks.34 The financial practices of the Italian States, the French trade routes and their échelles in the Levant, British trade through the monopolistic Levant Company, the Dutch involvement in the port cities of the Ottoman Empire and the Spanish maritime caravans that drew Greeks out of Gibraltar towards the Spanish colonies in Latin America all instigated, in one way or another, the expansion of Greek maritime activities.35 The Greeks, like the Armenians and the Jews, were minority cross-cultural brokers who played a significant role in the economic development of the Ottoman Empire.36 The role of minorities as economic actors and neutral

34 35

36

Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η εισβολή της ναυτιλίας των “Γραικών”’, 225–49. Olga Katsiardi-Hering, ‘Η αυστριακή πολιτική και η ελληνική ναυσιπλοΐα, 1750–1800’ [Austrian Policy and Greek Navigation, 1750–1800], Παρουσία 5 (1987), 445–537; Paul Masson, Histoire du commerce français dans le Levant au XVIIIeme siècle (Paris: Hachette, 1911); Edhem Eldem, French Trade in Istanbul in the Eighteenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 62; Xavier Labat Saint Vincent, ‘Malte et le commerce français au XVIIIème siècle’, 2 vols (Unpublished PhD thesis, University Paris-IV, 2000). Galani, ‘British Shipping and Trade in the Mediterranean’; Despina Vlami, ‘Βρετανικό εμπόριο και διπλωματία στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο: η Levant Company στη Θεσσαλονίκη, 1792–1825’ [British Trade and Diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean: The Levant Company in Thessaloniki, 1792–1825], Μεσαιωνικά και Νέα Ελληνικά 9 (2008), 143–267; Elena Frangakis-Syrret, ‘Commercial Practices and Competition in the Levant: The British and the Dutch in Eighteenth-century Izmir’ in Alastair Hamilton, Alexander H. De Groot and Maurits H. van den Boogert (eds), Friends and Rivals in the East: Studies in Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Levant from the Seventeenth to the Early Nineteenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 135–58; Eloy Martìn Corrales, ‘Greek – Ottoman Captains in the Service of Spanish Commerce in the Late Eighteenth Century’ in Maria Fusaro, Colin Heywood, Mohamed Salah Omri (eds), Trade and Cultural Exchange in the Early Modern Mediterranean (London: IB Tauris, 2010), 203–22. Harlaftis and Galani, ‘Maritime Migrations of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea’; further on brokerage and middlemen, see Edna Bonanich, ‘A Theory of Middleman Minorities’, American Sociological Review 38 (1973), 583–94; Emrah Safa Gürkan, ‘Mediating Boundaries: Mediterranean Go-betweens and Cross-confessional Diplomacy in Constantinople, 1560–1600’, Journal of Early Modern History 19 (2015), 107–28; Fariba Zarinebaf, Mediterranean Encounters: Trade and Pluralism in Early Modern Galata (Oakland: University of California Press, 2018); Benjamin Arbel, Trading Nations: Jews and Venetians in the Early Modern Eastern Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill, 1995); E. Natalie Rothman, Brokering Empire: Trans-imperial Subjects.

86

Galani

players has been common knowledge in economic and maritime history.37 Minorities acted as agents for foreign traders and at the same time, building upon this know-how, established their own connections and trade with the Western markets. By crossing borders and markets, the merchants and agents became the primary brokers of material and intellectual culture in the early modern period. Along with goods that formulated market preferences such as currants from the Ionian Islands or coffee from the Asian hinterland, traders circulated artefacts, fashion, music, technology and even religious practices and legal tools, which fertilised the host societies and promoted global integration. The significance of middlemen, which justifies their role as intermediaries, is that they are positioned between the social elites and the lower masses.38 In the case of the Greeks, their Christian faith categorised them as second-class citizens within the Ottoman Empire; however, their special skills, such as languages and seafaring abilities, differentiated them from the rest of the Ottoman subjects. All European traders in the Levant, despite their individual differences, had to overcome the liability of foreignness in the Mediterranean.39 The term describes the cost of conducting business in an alien environment, where the newcomer, in this case the European merchants, is at a competitive disadvantage due to distance, asymmetric information and a limited understanding of the local market. Distance took on more than one dimension and included the geographical remoteness between the agent and the principal, as well as the cultural discrepancies, the different political statuses and agendas between 37

38 39

Sebouh Aslanian, From the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean: The Global Trade Network of Armenian Merchants from New Julfa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011); Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, ‘Small Town Merchants, Global Ventures: The Maritime Trade of the New Julfan Armenians in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’ in Maria Fusaro and Amelia Polonia (eds), Maritime History as Global History, Research in Maritime History, no. 43 (2010), 125–58. Hubert Blalock, Towards a Theory of Minority Group Relations (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1967), 79–84. Katerina Galani ‘Foreigners in an Unfamiliar Market: European Business Practices and Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean in the 18th Century’ in Michela D’Angelo, Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassallo (eds), Making Waves in the Mediterranean (Messina: Istituto Di Studi Storici Gaetano Salvemini, 2012), 359–71. The term was originally coined by Stephen Hymer, The International Operation of National Firms: A Study of Direct Investment (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1976); Srilata Zaheer, ‘Overcoming the Liability of Foreignness’, Academy of Management Journal 38/2 (1995), 341–63; Bent Petersen and Torben Pedersen, ‘Coping with Liability of Foreignness: Different Learning Engagements of Entrant Firms’, Journal of International Management 8 (2002), 339–50. Also see Geoffrey Jones, Multinationals and Global Capitalism: From the Nineteenth to the Twenty-first Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 5–6.

Caught Between Empires

87

the European countries and the Ottoman Empire. Foreignness can be further perceived in economic terms, in the profound differences in the structure and function of the markets in Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean that made the Levant an unfamiliar territory for Westerners.40 The suspicious ‘Levantine ways’ of business, striking a balance between speculation and corruption, the customary bribery (avanias) of state officials to maintain fiscal and mercantile privileges, issues of commercial credit and trust, linguistic difficulties and particular market preferences all complicated European trade business in the Levant.41 This common organisational problem was largely alleviated by recruiting agents locally, from the middlemen minorities. The idea of cross-cultural cooperation and commission agency has been crucial for the development of international trade networks.42 The Ottoman Empire was distrustful towards Westerners, whose position remained fragile and was frequently renegotiated and placed at the discretion of the authorities. Cooperation was in the best interest of both contracting parties. The Western Europeans secured the services of local translators (dragomans), warehousemen, scribes, brokers and money changers through a system of patents and protection,43 while the minorities, as their partners and intermediaries, reinforced their position in the domestic market and acquired a communication channel towards the Western markets. The legal framework which regulated Western commercial activity in the Eastern Mediterranean was strictly defined by the capitulatory regime. Since the early sixteenth century, the Sublime Porte had signed commercial agreements first with French and subsequently with British and Dutch merchants. The treaties were bestowed by each Sultan individually and had to be renewed by his successor, giving the chance to renegotiate their terms with the grantees. In the early years of this practice, the treaties were considered as unilateral and the Sultan had the right to revoke them at will. With the gradual decline of the Ottoman Empire and its increasing economic dependence on Western 40 41 42 43

Pankaj Ghemawat, ‘Distance Still Matters: The Hard Reality of Global Expansion’, Harvard Business Review 79/8 (2001), 137–47. Galani, ‘Foreigners in an Unfamiliar Market’, 359–71. Francesca Trivellato, The Familiarity of Strangers: The Sephardic Diaspora, Livorno and Cross-cultural Trade in the Early Modern Period (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2009). On a discussion on the different nuances of intermediation, see Maurits van den Boogert, ‘Ottoman Intermediaries in the 18th Century: Analysis of a “Dirty Trade”’, Oriente Moderno 93/2 (2013), 515–30; Maurits van den Boogert, The Capitulations and the Ottoman Legal System: Qadis, Consuls and Beraths in the 18th Century (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 63–72. Also see Zarinebaf, Mediterranean Encounters, 91–125.

88

Galani

Europe, the agreements were acknowledged as bilateral.44 The system of capitulations facilitated the commercial activities of the Westerners in the Ottoman market through trade and fiscal privileges. In specific terms, European merchants were entitled to a reduced 3% customs duty (4%–5% being the rule for Ottoman subjects) and were exempted from other taxes and additional customs on goods in transit. Naturally, the capitulations also regulated the relations between the Westerners and their local partners. The European communities had the right to bestow berats – that is, patents of protection – to Ottoman subjects, who would serve as interpreters for the respective consulate. In due course, the beratlis were only dragomans by name, and the patents were granted to local agents and merchants. The bearer was entitled to all the economic and political benefits of the foreign merchants, such as immunity, religious liberty, fiscal and trade privileges. In practice, they were considered foreign nationals, exempted from capitation and other taxes, who could trade under lower tariffs as foreign traders. The berat extended to the holder’s sons and two servants, who were entitled to separate documents of protection (nefer fermans). In due course, these secondary patents were granted not to actual servants but to family and friends, to extend protection to a wider circle.45 The patent was a deed of appointment for life, which could not be sold or bequeathed. Upon the beratli’s death, the berat was no longer valid and would return to the issuing authority. Due to their economic and political significance, berats would be auctioned off to the highest bidder by the ambassadors of the foreign communities. These sales, which were highly competitive, added to the personal income of the ambassador, while the cost of a berat varied according to the country that issued it; it depended on the scale of trade with the Ottoman Empire, the current relations with the Sublime Porte, as well as the personal skills of the ambassador to protect his fellow citizens. French berats were the most expensive, seconded by the British, while Austrian, Russian, Dutch, Spanish or Neapolitan patents were considerably cheaper.46 The abuse of the protection patents led to a dramatic increase in the number of local barrataires, that vexed foreign traders who saw their trade significantly curtailed.47 Vexation 44 45 46 47

Halil Inalcık and Donald Quataert (eds), An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire 1300–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 190. Antonis Anastasopoulos, ‘Building Alliances: A Christian Merchant in Eighteenth-century Karafery’, Oriento Moderno 86/1 (2006), 72. Cihan Artunç, ‘The Price of Legal Institutions: The Beratlı Merchants in the Eighteenthcentury Ottoman Empire’, Journal of Economic History 75/03 (2015), 720–48. TNA, FO 261/4, Letter of Lord Ainslie to John Abbott at Aleppo, 22 February 1782.

Caught Between Empires

89

also spread among the Muslim population, as berat holders transformed into a powerful economic elite, and urged the Porte to make several attempts to regulate the number of patents in circulation. One of the biggest benefits that derived from the licences was the access to European legal institutions for contracting and litigation. As legal pluralism characterised the Ottoman Empire, different legal jurisdictions coexisted, and hence the non-Muslim minorities had recourse to either their intracommunal courts or the Islamic law, especially for cross-communal disputes. The berats granted recourse to a third alternative, the European law, which was extremely useful for safeguarding property rights in international business. It was not uncommon for members of the same family or partners to acquire different berats to broaden their scope of choices and shift jurisdiction to appeal to the most favourable judge at any given time.48 The protection of business through legal options was also feasible for the Ottoman subjects who settled in merchant communities abroad, for example in Livorno, Trieste, Marseille or Amsterdam. In this case, expatriated Greek merchants who traded in the Eastern Mediterranean were placed under the protection of a foreign country by naturalisation. Interestingly enough, evidence shows that they would also remain attached to their identity by birth, as Ottoman subjects, and they would swap identities according to the occasion.49 The system of protection, however, had several grey zones. Tax exemption for Greek beratlis sparked intracommunal tensions, as the case of Demetrios Bekellas from Karaferye (Veroia) demonstrated.50 The Orthodox communities would exert pressure on their protected members to share, nevertheless, fiscal burdens under the threat of excommunication and social isolation. The licences of trade and the protection system were in fact the springboard for the Ottoman subjects to become integrated into the networks of European merchants. Greek barrataires or protégés became the primary intermediaries between the foreign mercantile groups and the Ottoman State and society.51 In due course, the power of balance shifted in favour of local agents. One indicative example is the effective replacement of Dutch merchants by the Greeks in Smyrna. Dutch free trade policies enabled the Greeks to settle in Amsterdam, 48 49

50 51

Artunç, ‘The Price of Legal Institutions’, 720–48. Hasan Çolak, ‘Amsterdam’s Greek Merchants: Protégés of the Dutch, Beneficiaries of the Russians, Subjects of the Ottomans and Supporters of Greece’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 42/1 (2018), 115–33; van den Boogert, ‘Ottoman Greeks in the Dutch Levant Trade’, 133–6; Mathieu Grenet, La Fabrique Communautaire. Les Grecs à Venise, Livourno et Marseille, v. 1770–v. 1840 (Rome: Ecole française de Rome, 2016). Anastasopoulos, ‘Building Alliances’, 68, 74. Alfred Wood, The History of the Levant Company (London: Routledge, 1964), 135, 154–5, 191.

90

Galani

obtain Dutch citizenship and continue to trade directly with the Ottoman Empire.52 In 1804, a Greek merchant in Amsterdam, Marcella, became the first imperial consul, appointed to protect and serve Ottoman subjects residing in the Dutch port.53 The most striking example of mediation and cooperation with Western merchants is the case of the Levant Company. Under the ordinances of the capitulations, British presence in the Eastern Mediterranean was dominated by a chartered company, whose members held the monopoly of trade with the Ottoman Empire. Though unique in the Mediterranean, the British Levant Company was not an uncommon business model for trading overseas for the European countries.54 However, contrary to other chartered companies, which were joint-stock and had assumed political and military responsibilities, the Levant Company was a regulated company, combining public and private property rights. In practice it was a loose federation of individual merchants trading on their own account, under the protection of the British Crown. Entry was strictly controlled: the prerequisites for admission were permanent residence in the City of London and the profession of ‘mere merchant’, as opposed to that of low tradesman or shopkeeper.55

52

53

54

55

Van den Boogert, ‘Ottoman Greeks in the Dutch Levant Trade’, 129–47; Ismail Hakki Kadi, Ottoman and Dutch Merchants in the 18th Century: Competition and Cooperation in Ankara, Izmir and Amsterdam (Leiden, 2012), 170–97; Elena Frangakis-Syrett, ‘Commercial Practices and Competition in the Levant: The British and the Dutch in the Eighteenth-century Izmir’ in Hamilton, De Groot and van den Boogert (eds), Friends and Rivals in the East, 150–2. Ismail Hakki Kadi, ‘On the Edges of an Ottoman World: Non-Muslim Ottoman Merchants in Amsterdam’, in Christine M. Woodhead (ed.) The Ottoman World (London: Routledge, 2012), 284–6. For a brief history of the Marcella family in Smyrna, see Maria-Christina Chatziioannou, ‘Η συγκρότηση των χριστιανικών εμπορικών δικτύων στην οθωμανική Σμύρνη, 18ος–19ος αιώνας’ [The Construction of Christian Trade Networks in Ottoman Smyrna, 18th–19th Centuries] in Σμύρνη: Η ανάπτυξη μιας μητρόπολης της Ανατολικής Μεσογείου, 17ος αι.–1922 [Smyrna: The Development of a Metropolis in the Eastern Mediterranean, 17th c. –1922] (Athens: Academy of Athens, 2016), 102–5. Recently on chartered companies, see Michael Wagner, The English Chartered Trading Companies, 1688–1763: Guns, Money and Lawyers (New York/Abingdon: Routledge, 2018); Chris Nierstrasz, Rivalry for Trade in Tea and Textiles: The English and Dutch East India Companies (1700–1800) (Basingstoke: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2015); Donald C. Wellington, French East India Companies: A Historical Account and Record of Trade (Lanham, MD: Hamilton Books, 2006); Jan De Vries and A. van der Woude, The First Modern Economy: Success, Failure and Perseverance of the Dutch Economy, 1500–1815 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Elena Frangakis-Syrett, The Commerce of Smyrna in the Eighteenth Century (1700–1820) (Athens: Centre for Asia Minor Studies, 1992), 77.

Caught Between Empires

91

However, the idiosyncratic nature of the Levant Company facilitated the infiltration of free traders and local agents in British trade at the turn of the nineteenth century. The French and Napoleonic Wars were the catalysts that precipitated this development. Under pressure, the British adopted a series of flexible business practices across the theatres of war and managed to sustain their commerce and circumvent the French economic embargo. As the comparative study of two European seas revealed, trade was concentrated on protected trade routes, orbiting around islands with dual, both naval and mercantile, function. Furthermore, partnerships and alliances were forged with local economic agents, who were neutral to the conflicts and took on British trade.56 In the Mediterranean, the Levant Company suspended de facto its monopoly in the Ottoman Empire and non-Muslim Ottoman subjects, predominantly Greeks, gained ground in the British network as both carriers and traders. British trade was concentrated along an insular zone formed by the Ionian Islands, Sicily and predominantly Malta, a naval base which became the biggest redistribution hub for British trade during the war.57 It is therefore no coincidence that Malta attracted an impressive number of Greek ships, hoisting either an Ottoman or an Ionian flag. In 1809 Greek arrivals reached a peak, as 347 ships entered the port.58 From thereon, British ships would undertake the westward leg of the journey, to Britain. Due to this new market, a number of Greek commercial houses sprung up in Malta in the 1810s and subsequently Greek merchants settled in London, where they became engaged in trade and finance.59 56

57

58

59

For a comparative analysis of British reaction to economic warfare in the Baltic and the Mediterranean, see Katerina Galani, ‘The Story of Two Straits: British Shipping to the Baltic and the Mediterranean in the Late 18th Century’, Early Modern Shipping and Trade: Novel Approaches Using the Sound Toll Register Online (Boston/Leiden: Brill, 2018), 114–31. Galani, British Shipping in the Mediterranean, 81–4, 213–18, 225; Michela D’ Angelo, ‘British Trade and Merchants in the Mid-Mediterranean: An Alternative Market During the Napoleonic Wars’ in Carmel Vassallo and Michela D’Angelo (eds), Anglo-Saxons in the Mediterranean: Commerce, Politics and Ideas (XVII–XX centuries) (Malta: Malta University Press, 2007), 97–114. Gerassimos D. Pagratis, ‘Ionian Shipping and Trade in the Port of Malta (Late 18th– Early 19th Centuries)’, in Carmel Vassallo (ed.), Valletta: The Port of Malta (Malta, 2018), 175–97; Katerina Papakonstantinou, ‘Malta and the Rise of the Greek-owned Fleet in the Eighteenth-century’, Journal of Mediterranean Studies 16/1 (2006), 199–217; Frank Theuma, ‘Ένας περίπλους στις αρχές του 19ου αιώνα. Η ελληνική ναυτιλία στη Μάλτα, 1800–1821’ [A Periplus for the Early Nineteenth Century; Greek Shipping Bound for Malta, 1800–1821], Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 592–3. Katerina Galani, ‘Greek Merchant Bankers in the City of London: Their First Settlement (Early 19th Century)’, in Anglo-Greek Relations: Aspects of their Recent History (Athens: Greek Parliament, 2014), 237–56; Maria-Christina Chatziioannou and Gelina Harlaftis,

92

Galani

In this light, British trade in the Eastern Mediterranean did not dwindle during the years of war, albeit the historical conjuncture required the transformation of the monopolistic company, of its pre-existing networks and practices.60 However, a thorough probe in the lists of admittances in the Levant Company between 1766 and 1825 affirms that Greeks were never officially admitted to the Company, although membership became broader.61 It seems that official membership was unnecessary. On the one hand, the use of a patent of protection (berat), along with all its benefits, empowered Greek traders to grow their business and participate in the foreign networks. On the other hand, at the turn of the nineteenth century, the Company’s top-down policy acknowledged the contribution of Ottoman agents in the preservation of Levantine trade in the turbulent years of war. On an official level, Greeks served as vice-consuls and local representatives for the Company in ports and cities across the Ottoman Empire  – for example in mainland Greece, the Aegean Islands, Cyprus and Syria  – in the absence of a British appointee.62 Yet more importantly, the Company’s regulations were gradually loosened and the monopoly on trade and shipping became ineffective long before its revocation in 1825. A close look at the Company’s orders, bylaws and official documents shows that Ottoman subjects were par excellence equated to Levant Company members, in flat contradiction to a long-standing, rigid tradition of discrimination and exclusion.63 Progressively, Greek-Ottomans were distinguished from foreign traders and British free traders (i.e. non-members) and carried the same trade, on the same terms as the Company members. Such a concession did not come without complaints from the British factors, as they witnessed an alarming intrusion by the Greeks into their business.64 Local actors in practice

60 61 62 63

64

‘From the Levant to the City of London: Mercantile Credit in the Greek International Commercial Networks of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries’ in Philip Cottrell, Evan Lange and Ulf Olsson (eds), Centres and Peripheries in Banking: The Historical Development of Financial Markets (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), 13–40. Galani, British Shipping in the Mediterranean, 201–10; Wood, The History of the Levant Company, 191–8. TNA, SP 105/333 (New members that were admitted to the Levant Company). Despina Vlami, Trading with the Ottomans (London: IB Tauris, 2014), 163–6. Levant Company, By-Laws of the Levant Company, 1812 (London: n.p., 1813), 14; TNA, SP 105/173 (Register of impositions paid on outward cargoes, 1799–1813). For a detailed presentation and analysis of the source, see Galani, British Shipping in the Mediterranean, 199–210. TNA, SP 105/129 (Smyrna, 17 July 1797, Consul Werry to the Governing Body of the Levant Company in London) and also see Frangakis-Syrett, The Commerce of Smyrna, 111–14; Despina Vlami, Trading with the Ottomans (London: IB Tauris, 2014), 163–6; Despina Vlami, ‘British Trade and Diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean’, The Historical Review/ La Revue historique VI (2009), 154.

Caught Between Empires

93

threatened the entire trade of the old members, rather than merely their monopoly. However, their objections were expressed towards the Company’s directors in London to no avail. In this new equation, neutrality was a decisive variable in favour of local agents. With the outbreak of the French Wars and the disruption of business, Greeks were allowed to carry British trade from the Levant on their own account, on their own vessels provided the mediation of a member (in charge of the cargo). In so doing, they were exempted from the 20% duty levied on the value of the goods, which all foreign merchants were charged, and were only subject to customs and consulage fees, in alignment with the Company’s freemen. In 1806, James Sarell received goods from London ‘on account of the freemen of the said Company or of such as have their licence to trade or of Ottoman subjects’.65 While this concession predominantly seems to have accommodated the British interest by exploiting the local neutral agents, very soon reciprocity of trade was attained and Ottoman subjects were allowed to trade directly from Britain, on British or Ottoman vessels, on the same terms as the Company members. The Anglo-Turkish War of 1807–9 led to the forced relocation of British traders to Malta, and their growing dependence on their Ottoman partners and agents, who were left behind to continue to trade. The peace treaty of Dardanelles sealed the war and for the first time allowed Ottoman subjects to reside and establish commercial houses in Britain, as was the case for Amsterdam earlier. Drawing on their favourable position, Greeks had subverted in practice the monopoly on trade and shipping and cooperated with foreign and British merchants, who were not members of the Levant Company. Over the years, the ledgers of the Levant Company, such as the Book of Impositions paid by the Company members in Constantinople, mirrored the changing reality. In the aftermath of the Anglo-Turkish War, the registers became less thorough, more abstractive in their details, even though the actual traffic had increased. In several cases even the language is not consistent, and several recordings are made in Italian or French by the consignees, as it was the common practice for the merchants themselves to fill in the entry. From 1810 onwards, upon a ship’s entry, its flag is recorded, a fact that had never occurred in the previous years. Where previously it was taken for granted that all ships 65

TNA, SP 105/173 (Register of impositions paid on outward cargoes, 1799–1813, Constantinople, 16 April 1806). The oath was revised by the Company’s bylaws. In the ones decreed in 1812 (articles 19–21) the members should affirm: ‘I affirm by the oath that I have taken to the Levant Company, that the goods above mentioned are for account of myself, or of other free of the said Company, or that the goods are purchased with freight received in Turkey or Egypt or that they are for account of Ottoman subjects.’

94

Galani

were British, this was no longer a reasonable assumption. The vast majority of ships were non-British. In 1811, out of the twenty ships that are listed in the Company’s book, only three are British, belonging to those that had regular connections to the Levant. All of the ships – from 1810 to 1813 – declare Malta as port of departure instead of London. This affirms the shift in the British strategy and the concentration of trade on the safe port of Malta. However, trade was no longer carried through company members, and cargoes were shipped in most cases ‘on the account of’ a foreign merchant (e.g. Greek, Italian, Jew, Maltese), as the ledgers of the Company reveal. At the same time, the quota of charterers per ship appears to rise significantly, suggesting that trade was divided among a bigger pool of merchants rather than concentrated on a few factors. While in the earlier years cargoes were collected by a few prominent British factors with a mean average of three per ship, at the end of the period an array of merchants feature in the registers. The repeal of the monopoly had led to the democratisation of trade and the participation of small-scale merchants, who exploited the British network to embark on business. The example of the ship Carmelo, with her captain Lorenzo Bonnici, is indicative of the change. On 11 December 1811 she sailed from Constantinople to Zante and Cephalonia, carrying a mixed cargo of salted fish, linen, nails, beer, rum and leather. The ship was chartered by an impressive twelve consigners – some of them only shipped a limited cargo – who paid their duty to the Levant Company. All of the consigners were Greek-Ottoman subjects, and the actual entry in the Book of Impositions was written in Italian.66 These developments paved the way for the strengthening of Greek shipping and set the foundations for the brisk commercial houses of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. They followed the trails of British sea routes and expanded their business from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea and, later, to the colonial markets of Asia and North America. The Ralli, along with other Greek merchants such as the Petrocochini, the Maurocordati, the Macri, the Negreponte, the Scaramangas, the Schinas, all Greek-Ottoman families coming from the island of Chios and established in Constantinople, feature in the Book of Impositions among the consignees of the Levant Company cargoes in the early nineteenth century. These families, which formed the core of the Greek diaspora in the Black Sea, the Danube district and the cities of Central and Western Europe, evolved into an entrepreneurial and mercantile elite of national and international calibre. It is no coincidence that these families, infiltrating the British trade networks, were transferred to the City of London, 66

TNA, SP 105/173 (Register of Impositions paid on Outward Cargoes, 1799–1813, Constantinople, 10 December 1811).

Caught Between Empires

95

where they entered the financial circles and established a number of merchant banks by the mid-nineteenth century.67 2

The Ottoman Response

While the European powers claimed an ever-growing share of the Ottoman market through agents, from 1802 onwards the Ottoman State became proactive against the European menace. One of its principal aims was to foster a local body of international traders and reclaim the Ottoman subjects under foreign protection. A progressive policy (Tanzimat) permeating all aspects of the economic and political sphere, was implemented by Selim III in the late eighteenth century, aiming at the modernisation and reorganisation of the Ottoman State.68 Special care was taken in naval and maritime affairs, and thus during his reign a Ministry of Naval Affairs was established for the first time.69 Among the reforms, privileges and incentives were granted to Ottoman subjects, and especially to Greek seafarers, who became greatly engaged in maritime trade and shipping. Recently, Pagratis has brought to attention shipping and trade privileges that extended to the Greeks of the Ionian Islands as well.70 As the Septinsular Republic was brought to life with the blessings of the Tsar and the Sultan, the islanders received imperial concessions in the form of trade diploma, in analogy to the ones granted to foreign merchants through the capitulations. These included reduced customs, exemptions from duties and the use of the Ottoman flag at will, which allowed the Ionians to enter the Black Sea and cater for Constantinople.  Selim aimed to promote the formation of an Ottoman fleet to rival European powers and conduct the seaborne trade of the empire, particularly

67

68

69 70

Chatziioannou and Harlaftis, ‘From the Levant to the City of London’, 13–40; Ioanna Minoglou, ‘Ethnic Minority Groups in International Banking: Greek Diaspora Bankers of Constantinople and the Ottoman State Finances c. 1840–1881’, Financial History Review 9/2 (2002), 125–46. Also see Chapter 11 in this volume (K. Vourkatioti). Stanford Shaw, Between Old and New: The Ottoman Empire under Sultan Selim III, 1789–1807 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), 180–99; Halil Inalcık, ‘Application of the Tanzimat and Its Social Effects’, Archivum Ottomanicum 5 (1973), 97–127; Tulay Artan and Halil Berktay, ‘Selimian Times: A Reforming Grand Admiral, Anxieties of Re-possession, Changing Rites of Power’ in Elizabeth Zachariadou (ed.), The Kapudan Pasha, His Office and His Domain (Rethymnon: Crete University Press, 2002), 8–16. Tuncay Zorlu, Innovation and Empire in Turkey: Sultan Selim III and the Modernization of the Ottoman Navy (London: IB Tauris, 2011). Pagratis, ‘The Ottoman Empire and the Ionian Maritime Enterprises’, 29–33.

96

Galani

in the Aegean and the Black Sea.71 Non-Muslim Ottoman subjects were proclaimed as ‘merchants of Europe’ (Avrupa tüccarlari), enjoying the same privileges as the protégés of the European nations settled in the Ottoman Empire, albeit receiving their protection directly from the Sublime Porte.72 Another form of patents was granted to Acem tüccarlari, to protect merchants from Persia.73 Each imperial patent was granted to a merchant, his sons and two servants, in analogy to the European patents. A number of privileges were granted to merchants, while shipowners alone were favoured by the exemption from capitation.74 The Ottoman patents were significantly cheaper, and although they did not manage to outdo the Europeans, they broadened the base of merchants engaged in international trade, incorporating members of rising social groups and soothing political tension.75 Imperial protection went a step further, expanding to the westward markets. Selim’s decision to establish reciprocal diplomacy in the capitals of Europe would advocate Ottoman subjects and their trade abroad (any claim for equal treatment to Ottoman subjects abroad) and spurred anxiety among the European nations. As the British Consul Werry informed the headquarters of the Levant Company in London in 1797, ‘the Turkish Ambassador is instructed to ask for the same privileges for Ottoman subjects [to trade] to England that the British have in Turkey’.76 The same occurred in Amsterdam, where Greek-Ottoman subjects petitioned in the late eighteenth century for their exemption from Dutch duties, in reciprocity to the exemption indulged by European traders within the Ottoman Empire.77

71 72

73 74 75 76

77

Fatma Müge Gӧçek, Rise of the Bourgeoisie, Demise of Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 92–97. Sophia Laiou, ‘The Ottoman Greek “Merchants of Europe” at the Beginning of the 19th Century’ in Evangelia Balta, Georgios Salakidis and Theoharis Stavrides (eds), Festschrift in Honor of Ioannis P. Theocharides: Studies on the Ottoman Empire and Turkey (Istanbul: Isis, 2014), 313–31; Harlaftis and Laiou, ‘Ottoman State Policy in Mediterranean Trade and Shipping’, 15; Bruce Masters, ‘The Sultan’s Entrepreneurs: The Avrupa Tüccarıs and the Hayriye Tüccarıs in Syria’, International Journal of Middle East Studies 24/4 (1992), 579–97. Svetlana Ivanova, ‘The Empire’s “Own” Foreigners: Armenian and Acem Tüccar in Rumeli in the 17th and 18th centuries’, Oriente Moderno 22 (83)/200, 681–703. Laiou, ‘The Ottoman Greek “Merchants of Europe”’, 322. Laiou, ‘The Ottoman Greek “Merchants of Europe”’, 315–16. TNA, SP 105/126, Consul Werry to Levant Co, London (17 June 1797, Smyrna) cited in Elena Frangakis-Syrett, ‘Armenian, Greek and Jewish Communities in Smyrna’, Trade and Money: The Ottoman Economy in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries (Istanbul: Isis, 2007), 302. Maurits van den Boogert, ‘Ottoman Greeks in the Dutch Levant Trade’, 129–47.

Caught Between Empires

97

Besides his aspiration to maximise external trade and thus customs revenues, in political terms, Selim introduced the tanzimat to actively protect the state against political and economic groups gradually gaining power within the empire, who could challenge the authority of the Sultan. In addition to the military and religious elites, the protégés of the European powers had become an influential business group reinforced by capital accumulation from the external trade of the empire and by their political alliances and partnerships with the Westerners.78 3

Conclusion

This chapter addressed the rise of Greek shipping and trade in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century in relevance to the empires within which they lived and worked. Their position in the Mediterranean market was reinforced by the outbreak of wars between the European powers and the intention of the Ottoman State to protect its trade from the intrusion of Western merchants. In this advantageous historical conjuncture, Greeks evolved from a traditional maritime population into a peripheral and international carrier. They gained access to markets within and outside the Mediterranean, they established trade networks, they put into practice their accumulated knowledge of seaborne trade and adopted business practices of sophistication and specialisation. The key to their growth lies in their dual and complementary role of middleman minority and neutral carrier. On the one hand they profited from the war-induced reallocation of the shipping market, replacing the belligerent European powers in the Mediterranean ports. On the other hand, they forged a special business ethos and became familiarised with European practices through their role as agents and intermediaries in the Levant. Their upsurge in the eighteenth century was embedded in continuity and change. It was built on a long-standing interaction with the sea, as well as on the emergence of a mercantile community across the Ionian and the Aegean seas. Having contributed to the hands-on abolition of mercantilism and protectionism in the Eastern Mediterranean, in the following century some of the local players, either the most daring or the most successful, would make their way to the mercantile and financial centres of Western Europe and the Black 78

Sofia Laiou, ‘Η ανάπτυξη της ελληνικής εμπορικής ναυτιλίας και ο ρόλος του Οθωμανικού κράτους στις αρχές του 19ου αιώνα’ [The Development of Greek Merchant Shipping and the Role of the Ottoman State] in Harlaftis and Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 138–44.

98

Galani

Sea; there they would find their place among the leading figures of the Greek diaspora. It was during this period that the Greeks established their networks in the overseas markets and shaped a business culture built on ethnic and kinship ties, following the patterns of other middleman minorities. In the Eastern Mediterranean, the economic emancipation bolstered the secession of the Greeks from the Ottoman Empire and the emergence of an independent state grounded on liberal principles. Bibliography Aaslestad Katherine B. and Johan Joor (eds), Revisiting Napoleon’s Continental System (London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2015). Alimento Antonella (ed.), War, Trade and Neutrality (Milan: FrancoAngeli, 2011). Anastasopoulos Antonis, ‘Building Alliances: A Christian Merchant in Eighteenthcentury Karafery’, Oriento Moderno 86/1 (2006). Andersen Dan and Hans Joachim Voth, ‘The Grapes of War: Neutrality and Mediterranean Shipping under the Danish flag, 1747–1807’, Scandinavian Economic History Review 48/1 (2000), 5–27. Arbel Benjamin, Trading Nations: Jews and Venetians in the Early Modern Eastern ­Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill, 1995). Artunç Cihan, ‘The Price of Legal Institutions: The Beratlı Merchants in the Eighteenthcentury Ottoman Empire’, Journal of Economic History 75/03 (2015), 720–48. Asdrachas Spyros, ‘Το ελληνικό Αρχιπέλαγος μία διάσπαρτη πόλη’ [Greek Archipelago: A Dispersed City] in Χάρτες και χαρτογράφοι του Αιγαίου Πελάγους [Maps and Cartographers of the Aegean] (Athens: Olkos, 1985), 235–48. Aslanian Sebouh, From the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean: The Global Trade Network of Armenian Merchants from New Julfa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011). Baghdiantz McCabe Ina, ‘Small Town Merchants, Global Ventures: The Maritime Trade of the New Julfan Armenians in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’ in Maria Fusaro and Amelia Polonia (eds), Maritime History as Global History, Research in Maritime History, no. 43 (2010), 125–58. Beaurepaire Pierre-Yves, ‘“No Law Ever Prohibited Neutral Caravans in Time of War”: The Fragility of Neutral Shipping in the Late Eighteenth-century Mediterranean’, International Journal of Maritime History 28/1 (2016), 180–92. Benady Tito, ‘The Settee Cut: The Mediterranean Passes Issued at Gibraltar’, The Mariner’s Mirror 87/3 (2001), 281–96. Blalock Hubert, Towards a Theory of Minority Group Relations (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1967), 79–84.

Caught Between Empires

99

Bonanich Edna, ‘A Theory of Middleman Minorities’, American Sociological Review 38 (1973), 583–94. Braudel Fernand, La Méditerranée et le Monde méditerranéen à l’ époque de Philippe II (Paris: Armand Colin, 1966). Chatziioannou Maria-Christina and Gelina Harlaftis, ‘From the Levant to the City of London: Mercantile Credit in the Greek International Commercial Networks of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries’ in Philip Cottrell, Evan Lange and Ulf Olsson (eds), Centres and Peripheries in Banking: The Historical Development of Financial Markets (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), 13–40. Chitty Joseph, A Treatise on the Laws of Commerce and Manufactures and the Contracts Relating Thereto (A. Strahan, 1824). Çolak Hasan, ‘Amsterdam’s Greek Merchants: Protégés of the Dutch, Beneficiaries of the Russians, Subjects of the Ottomans and Supporters of Greece’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 42/1 (2018), 115–33. Colpan Asli M., Takashi Hikino and James R. Lincoln (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Business Groups (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). D’Angelo Michela, ‘British Trade and Merchants in the Mid-Mediterranean: An Alternative Market During the Napoleonic Wars’ in Carmel Vassallo and Michela D’Angelo (eds), Anglo-Saxons in the Mediterranean: Commerce, Politics and Ideas (XVII–XX centuries) (Malta: Malta University Press, 2007), 97–114. Davis Lance E. and Stanley L. Engerman, Naval Blockades in Peace and War: An Economic History Since 1750 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006). De Vries Jan and A. van der Woude, The First Modern Economy: Success, Failure and Perseverance of the Dutch Economy, 1500–1815 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Eloranta Jari et al. (eds), Small and Medium Powers in Global History: Trade, Conflicts and Neutrality from the 18th to the 20th Centuries (Abingdon: Routledge, 2019). Feldbæk Ole, ‘Eighteenth-century Danish Neutrality: Its Diplomacy, Economics and Law’, Scandinavian Journal of History 8 (1983), 3–21. Frangakis-Syrett Elena, ‘The Coastal Trade of the Ottoman Empire, from the Mideighteenth to the Early Nineteenth Centuries’ in John Armstrong-Andreas Kunz (eds) Coastal Shipping and the European Economy, 1750–1980 (Mainz-am-Rhein: Frank Cass & Co, 2002), 131–49. Frangakis-Syrret Elena, ‘Commercial Practices and Competition in the Levant: The British and the Dutch in Eighteenth-century Izmir’ in Alastair Hamilton, Alexander H. De Groot and Maurits H. van den Boogert (eds), Friends and Rivals in the East: Studies in Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Levant from the Seventeenth to the Early Nineteenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 135–58. Frangakis-Syrett Elena, The Commerce of Smyrna in the Eighteenth Century (1700–1820) (Athens: Centre for Asia Minor Studies, 1992).

100

Galani

Galani Katerina, ‘The Story of Two Straits: British Shipping to the Baltic and the Mediterranean in the Late 18th Century’, Early Modern Shipping and Trade: Novel Approaches Using the Sound Toll Register Online (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 114–31. Galani Katerina, ‘Galata Bankers and the International Banking of the Greek Business Group in the 19th Century’ in Eldem and Laiou (eds), Istanbul and the Black Sea Coast: Trade and Shipping (1770–1820) (Istanbul: Isis, 2018), 49–76. Galani Katerina, British Shipping in the Mediterranean During the Napoleonic Wars: The Untold Story of a Successful Adaptation (Leiden: Brill, 2017). Galani Katerina, «Η ελληνική κοινότητα του Λονδίνου. Μια κοινωνικο-οικονομική προσέγγιση» [The Greek Community in London in the 19th Century: A Socioeconomic Approach], Ιστορικά 63 (2016), 43–68. Galani Katerina, ‘Greek Merchant Bankers in the City of London: Their First Settlement (Early 19th Century)’, in Anglo-Greek Relations: Aspects of their Recent History (Athens: Greek Parliament, 2014), 237–56. Galani Katerina, ‘Foreigners in an Unfamiliar Market: European Business Practices and Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean in the 18th Century’ in Michela D’Angelo, Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassallo (eds), Making Waves in the Mediterranean (Messina: Istituto Di Studi Storici Gaetano Salvemini, 2012), 359–71. Galani Katerina, ‘British Shipping and Trade in the Mediterranean in the Age of War, 1770–1815’ (Doctoral thesis, University of Oxford, 2011). Galani Katerina, ‘The Napoleonic Wars and the Disruption of Mediterranean Trade; British and Greek Merchants in Livorno’, The Historical Review/La Revue Historique, vol. 7 (2010), 179–98. Gallant Thomas, Modern Greece: From the War of Independence to the Present (New York: Bloomsbury, 2016). Ghemawat Pankaj, ‘Distance Still Matters: The Hard Reality of Global Expansion’, Harvard Business Review 79/8 (2001), 137–47. Granovetter Mark, ‘Coase Revisited: Business Groups in the Modern Economy’, Industrial and Corporate Change 4/1 (1995), 93–130. Greene Molly, ‘Beyond the Northern Invasion: The Mediterranean in the Seventeenth Century’, Past and Present 174/1 (2002), 42–71. Grenet Mathieu, La Fabrique Communautaire. Les Grecs à Venise, Livourno et Marseille, v. 1770–v. 1840 (Rome: Ecole française de Rome, 2016). Guillen Mauro, ‘Business Groups in Emerging Economies: A Resource-based View’, The Academy of Management Journal 43/3 (2000), 3–62. Hakki Kadi Ismail, ‘On the Edges of an Ottoman World: Non-Muslim Ottoman Merchants in Amsterdam’, in Christine M. Woodhead (ed.) The Ottoman World (London: Routledge, 2012). Harlaftis Gelina and Katerina Galani, ‘Maritime Migrations of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea’ in Catia Antunes and Eric Tagliacozzo (eds), The

Caught Between Empires

101

Cambridge History of Global Migrations, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming). Harlaftis Gelina and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700– 1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821] (Athens, 2013). Harlaftis Gelina and Ioannis Theotokas, Leadership in World Shipping: Greek Family Firms in International Business (London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2009). Harlaftis Gelina and Sophia Laiou, ‘Ottoman State Policy in Mediterranean Trade and Shipping, c.1780–1820: The Rise of the Greek-owned Ottoman Merchant Fleet’ in Mark Mazower (ed.), Networks of Power in Modern Greece (London: Hurst & Co., 2008), 1–44. Harlaftis Gelina, A History of Greek-owned Shipping: The Making of an International Tramp Fleet, 1830 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 1996). Hoerder Dirk, ‘Global Migrations’ in J. Bentley (ed.), The Cambridge World History VI: The Construction of a Global World 1400–1800, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 3–28. Horden Peregrine and Nicholas Purcell, The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2000). Inalcık Halil and Donald Quataert (eds), An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire 1300–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994). Johansen Hans C., ‘Scandinavian Shipping in the Late Eighteenth Century in a European Perspective’, The Economic History Review 45/3 (1992). Jones Geoffrey, Multinationals and Global Capitalism: From the Nineteenth to the Twenty-first Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). Katsiardi-Hering Olga and Stassinopoulou (eds), Across the Danube: Southeastern Europeans and their Travelling Identities (17th–19th C.) (Leiden: Brill, 2017). Katsiardi-Hering Olga, ‘Η αυστριακή πολιτική και η ελληνική ναυσιπλοΐα, 1750–1800’ [Austrian Policy and Greek Navigation, 1750–1800], Παρουσία 5 (1987), 445–537. Laiou Sophia, ‘The Ottoman Greek “Merchants of Europe” at the Beginning of the 19th Century’ in Evangelia Balta, Georgios Salakidis and Theoharis Stavrides (eds), Festschrift in Honor of Ioannis P. Theocharides: Studies on the Ottoman Empire and Turkey (Istanbul: Isis, 2014), 313–31. Lopèz Nadal Gonçal, ‘Mediterranean Privateering between the Treaties of Utrecht and Paris, 1715–1856: First Reflexions’ in David Starkey, E.S. Van d’Eyck van Heslinga, Jaap de Moor (eds), Pirates and Privateers: New Perspectives on the War on Trade in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1997). Martín-Coralles Eloy, ‘Greek-Ottoman Captains in the Service of the Spanish Commerce in the Late 18th Century’ in Maria Fusaro, Colin Heywood and Mohamed Salah Omri (eds), Trade and Cultural Exchange in the Early Modern Mediterranean (London: IB Tauris, 2010), 203–22.

102

Galani

Marzagalli Silvia and Leos Müller, ‘“In Apparent Disagreement with All Law of Nations in the World”: Negotiating Neutrality for Shipping and Trade During the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars’, International Journal of Maritime History 28/1 (2016), 108–17. Marzagalli Silvia, ‘American Shipping and Trade in Warfare, or the Benefits of European Conflicts for Neutral Merchants: The Experience of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, 1793–1815’, Kyoto Sangyo University Economic Review 1 (March 2014), 1–29. Marzagalli Silvia, ‘Establishing Transatlantic Trade Networks in Time of War: Bordeaux and the United States, 1793–1815’, Business History Review 79/4 (2005), 811–44. Marzagalli Silvia, ‘American Shipping into the Mediterranean During the French Wars: A First Approach’ in Silvia Marzagalli, James Sofka and John McCusker (eds), Rough Waters: American Involvement with the Mediterranean in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Research in Maritime History, no. 44 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2010), 43–62. Masson Paul, Histoire du commerce français dans le Levant au XVIIIeme siècle (Paris: Hachette, 1911). Masters Bruce, ‘The Sultan’s Entrepreneurs: The Avrupa Tüccarıs and the Hayriye Tüccarıs in Syria’, International Journal of Middle East Studies 24/4 (1992), 579–97. Metcalf Alida, Go-Betweens and the Colonization of Brazil (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2006). Miller Michael B., Europe and the Maritime World: A Twentieth-century History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). Minoglou Ioanna, ‘Ethnic Minority Groups in International Banking: Greek Diaspora Bankers of Constantinople and the Ottoman State Finances c. 1840–1881’, Financial History Review 9/2 (2002), 125–46. Müge Göçek Fatma, Rise of the Bourgeoisie, Demise of Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996). Müller Leos, ‘Swedish Merchant Shipping in Troubled Times: The French Revolutionary Wars and Sweden’s Neutrality’, International Journal of Maritime History 28/1 (2016), 147–64. Müller Leos, Consuls, Corsairs, and Commerce: The Swedish Consular Service and Long-Distance Shipping, 1720–1815 (Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2004). Nierstrasz Chris, Rivalry for Trade in Tea and Textiles: The English and Dutch East India Companies (1700–1800) (Basingstoke: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2015). O’Rourke Kevin, ‘The Worldwide Economic Impact of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, 1793–1815’, Discussion Paper Series, Centre for Economic Policy Research, no. 5079 (May 2005). Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘The Ottoman Empire and the Ionian Maritime Enterprises in the Late 18th and Early 19th Centuries’ in Edhem Eldem and Sophia Laiou (eds),

Caught Between Empires

103

Istanbul and the Black Sea Coast: Trade and Shipping (1770–1820) (Istanbul: Isis, 2018), 27–33. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Ionian Shipping and Trade in the Port of Malta (Late 18th– Early 19th Centuries)’, in Carmel Vassallo (ed.), Valletta: The Port of Malta (Malta, 2018), 175–97. Pagratis Gerassimos D., ‘Η ναυτιλιακή επιχείρηση τον 18ο αιώνα: Η περίπτωση των Ελλήνων υπηκόων της Βενετίας’ [The Shipping Business in the Eighteenth Century: The Case of the Greek Subjects of Venice], Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821] (Athens, 2013), 457–66. Pagratis Gerassimos, ‘Shipping and Trade in the Ionian Islands: The Merchant Fleet of the Septinsular Republic (1800–1807)’, Journal of the Oxford University Historical Society 8 (Hilary, 2012). Papakonstantinou Katerina, ‘Malta and the Rise of the Greek-owned Fleet in the Eighteenth-century’, Journal of Mediterranean Studies 16/1 (2006), 199–217. Pizanias Petros, The Greek Revolution of 1821: A European Event (Istanbul: Isis, 2011). Pourchasse Pierrick, ‘Danish Shipping in the Mediterranean During the Revolutionary Wars’, International Journal of Maritime History 28/1 (2016), 165–79. Roberts Timothy, ‘Commercial Philanthropy: American Missionaries and the American Opium Trade in Izmir During the First Part of the Nineteenth Century’, Journal of Mediterranean Studies 19/2 (2010), 371–88. Rodriguez Moises Enrique, Under the Flags of Freedom: British Mercenaries in the War of the Two Brothers, the First Carlist War and the Greek War of Independence (1821– 1840) (Lanham: University Press of America, 2009). Rothman E. Natalie, Brokering Empire: Trans-imperial Subjects between Venice and Istanbul (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2012). Safa Gürkan Emrah, ‘Mediating Boundaries: Mediterranean Go-betweens and Cross-confessional Diplomacy in Constantinople, 1560–1600’, Journal of Early Modern History 19 (2015), 107–28. Sifneos Evrydiki and Gelina Harlaftis (eds), Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής, 18ος–αρχες 20ου αιώνα. Νέες προσεγγίσεις στην Ιστορία των Ελλήνων της Νότιας Ρωσίας [Greeks in the Azov 18th–Beginning of 20th Century: New Approaches in the History of the Greeks in South Russia], National Research Foundation, Institute of Historical Research (Athens, 2015). Stapelbroek Koen (ed.), Trade and War: The Neutrality of Commerce in the Inter-state System, Collegium, vol. 10 (Helsinki: University of Helsinki, 2011). Trivellato Francesca, The Familiarity of Strangers: The Sephardic Diaspora, Livorno and Cross-cultural Trade in the Early Modern Period (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2009).

104

Galani

Van den Boogert Maurits, ‘Ottoman Greeks in the Dutch Levant Trade: Collective Strategy and Individual Practice (c. 1750–1821)’, Oriente Moderno 86/1 (2006). Van den Boogert Maurits, The Capitulations and the Ottoman Legal System: Qadis, Consuls and Beraths in the 18th Century (Leiden: Brill, 2005). Vanneste Tijl, Global Trade and Commercial Networks: Eighteenth-century Diamond Merchants (London: Pickering & Chatto, 2011). Vlami Despina, Trading with the Ottomans (London: IB Tauris, 2014). Vlami Despina, ‘British Trade and Diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean’, The Historical Review/La Revue historique VI (2009). Vlami Despina, ‘Βρετανικό εμπόριο και διπλωματία στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο: η Levant Company στη Θεσσαλονίκη, 1792–1825’ [British Trade and Diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean: The Levant Company in Thessaloniki, 1792–1825], Μεσαιωνικά και Νέα Ελληνικά 9 (2008), 143–267. Wagner Michael, The English Chartered Trading Companies, 1688–1763: Guns, Money and Lawyers (New York/Abingdon: Routledge, 2018). Wellington Donald C., French East India Companies: A Historical Account and Record of Trade (Lanham, MD: Hamilton Books, 2006). Wood Alfred, The History of the Levant Company (London: Routledge, 1964). Zachariadou Elizabeth (ed.), The Kapudan Pasha, His Office and His Domain (Rethymnon: Crete University Press, 2002). Zaheer Srilata, ‘Overcoming the Liability of Foreignness’, Academy of Management Journal 38/2 (1995), 341–63. Zarinebaf Fariba, Mediterranean Encounters: Trade and Pluralism in Early Modern Galata (Oakland: University of California Press, 2018). Zorlu Tuncay, Innovation and Empire in Turkey: Sultan Selim III and the Modernization of the Ottoman Navy (London: IB Tauris, 2011).

Chapter 5

Piracy in the Aegean: Aspects and Contradictions of Stereotypes Dimitris Dimitropoulos On 10 December 1686, the secretary of the community of the island of Mykonos in the Aegean Sea, the priest Marcos Korinthios, draws up a contract in which a nun called Fruzeti undertakes to travel in Chios, in order to transfer the ransom for some women from Chios that are kept in slavery in Mykonos. The ransom is a total of 430 reals, of which thirty are the nun’s own reward. She will take with her a young slave, or sklavaki, and will have the responsibility for paying his ransom, while in the case of his death or captivity by corsairs, she will be exempted.1 This testimony vividly illustrates the different aspects of the complicated phenomena associated with piratical activity in the Aegean Sea, and with the slave trade, which is closely connected to the latter; it induces stimulus for thought and raises questions about piracy in the Greek seas. Some of these questions can be summarised as follows: 1) Chios and Mykonos, the Aegean Islands involved in the trade of slaves, were places of the slaves’ origin and captivity, and they both belonged to the Ottoman Empire.2 Moreover, in the case of Mykonos, where the sellers were based, the relevant document was authenticated and retained by the community authorities, which institutionally constituted a formulation of the administration of the Ottoman Empire. How, then, could the authorities that were established or at least accepted by the Ottoman rule validate contracts for people enslaved by pirates, whom 1 The document is published by Ant. Fl. Katsouros, Κουρσάροι και σκλάβοι, ανέκδοτα μυκονιάτικα και συριανά έγγραφα [Corsairs and Slaves: Unpublished Documents from Mykonos and Syros] (Syros, 1948), 21–22, doc. 8. 2 See other similar cases: George Koutzakiotis, ‘Corsairing and Slave Trading in the Cyclades During the Late Seventeenth Century’ in Gelina Harlaftis, Dimitris Dimitropoulos and David J. Starkey (eds), Corsairs and Pirates in the Eastern Mediterranean, Fifteenth–Nineteenth Centuries (Athens: AdVenture SA, 2016), 55–58. The sale of Muslims as slaves but also of zimmis (i.e. the followers of monotheistic religions who voluntarily accepted the sovereignty of Islam), even though it was not allowed by the Ottoman religious law, is not entirely absent from the current practice. On the existing conditions and restrictions on the slave trade in the Ottoman Empire, see Y. Hakan Erdem, Slavery in the Ottoman Empire and Its Demise, 1800–1909 (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1996), 18–39.

© Dimitris Dimitropoulos, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_006

106

2)

3)

Dimitropoulos

the Ottoman State persecuted? Is this attitude of the community authorities of Mykonos related to the particular time of the Venetian-Turkish War (1684–99) that raged in the Aegean, and the volatile situation that locals experienced while they were subject to bilateral pressures by the Ottoman and Venetian powers?3 A document written on 3 October 1686, only two months before the contract of the abovementioned nun, reveals the insecurity that was prevailing in the Cyclades Islands. To be more specific, the document reveals the large double fear the islanders were experiencing, firstly of the Muslims and especially their Bay, to whom they had to pay the kharaj (an Ottoman tax on agricultural land) according to the concession he had from the Sultan, and secondly of the Venetians, ‘the Christian masters who have conquered us nowadays’, as is stated in the document.4 The contract with the Fruzeti nun is drawn up by the secretary of the community with all the legal formalities, and is signed by the notables of the island. The language leaves no doubt about the nature of the transaction, which the author of the document neither makes any effort to conceal, nor describes in detail. Therefore, the handling of piratical spoils, with slaves being part of it, is recorded in the official books of the community and is subject to the general rules of law that ruled the transactions in the island of Mykonos. Out of these facts an interesting question arises: was trade in goods deriving from piratical activity legitimate, or at least tolerable, taking into consideration that the pirates were allegedly targeted by the Ottoman Empire? The intermediary between the relatives of the slaves and the sellers is a woman, and specifically a nun.5 She will travel from the island of

3 For the events of the Venetian-Turkish wars of the period and their impact on the Cyclades, see Ben J. Slot, Archipelagus turbatus: Les Cyclades entre colonisation latine et occupation ottomane c.1500–1718, vol. 1 (Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1982), 167–70, 240–6. 4 See General State Archives, Collection of Mykonos, K. 60, man. 136, doc. 43. 5 It is worth noting the different profile of the person who undertakes to mediate, in the early eighteenth century, for the release of Ottomans that had been brought to Malta. The mediator was experienced and aware of the circuit slave trade, and had been involved as a guarantor in the case of the Venetian consul in Thessaloniki (see Eyal Ginio, ‘Piracy and Redemption in the Aegean Sea During the First Half of the Eighteenth Century’, Turcica 33 (2001), 135–47. For the acquisition of Muslim prisoners in Malta, an interesting case is regarding the French consul in Malta, J. Dupuy, during the period of the early seventeenth century; see Pal Fodor, ‘Piracy, Ransom, Slavery and Trade: French Participation in the Liberation of the Ottoman Slaves from Malta during the 1620s’, Turcica 33 (2001), 119–33. Generally, on the terms of slave trade in the Mediterranean Sea, see M. Fontenay, ‘Le Maghreb barbaresque

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

4)

6 7

8 9

107

Mykonos to that of Chios carrying a young slave – presumably as proof that her assignors do indeed keep slaves  – for whom she is personally responsible.6 Assuming that the involvement of the nun is an act of Christian mercy to the enslaved women, who share her religion, then how could the large sum of thirty reals, reckoned to be her own fee, be justified?7 Could the abovementioned amount of money be justified because of the cost and the risks of the nun’s mission? Or is it just an important proof that, at least in this case, Christian duty can coincide with personal benefit? If the mission of the nun was successful, she would carry 430 reals on her return to Mykonos. This was a large sum of money. At this point and based on the sale prices at that time in Mykonos, it is interesting to note that with that money someone could have bought twenty houses.8 The use of a bill of exchange allowed commercial transactions without direct cash transfers.9 But how could the slave traders be sure to reclaim the et l’esclavage méditerranéen aux XV e–XVIIe siècles’, Les Cahiers de Tunisie 44/157–8 (1991), 7–43. For the particular role of the priests who were captured as slaves by the Ottomans, see Robert C. Davis, Esclaves Chrétiens, maîtres Musulmans: L’esclavage blanc en Méditerranée (1500–1800) (Cahors: Éditions Jacqueline Chambon, 2006), 153–6. The practice of pirates releasing someone arrested in order to arrange for the acquisition of the remaining, making the necessary contacts with the relatives, was not rare; see Stephen Clissold, The Barbary Slaves (London: Paul Elek, 1977), 103–4. The frequency with which the islanders were captured mainly as slaves had made them sensitive to the issue, and they had formed solidarity mechanisms both at an individual or family level and at a local or ecclesiastical level. See Dimitris Dimitropoulos, Η Μύκονος τον 17ο αιώνα. Γαιοκτητικές σχέσεις και οικονομικές συναλλαγές [Mykonos in the 17th Century: Land-ownership and Financial Transactions] (Athens: Institute of Neohellenic Research, 1997), 322–31. On the other hand, for Muslims it was considered as a pious act to participate in the releasing of prisoners: see Manuela Marin and Rachid El Hour, ‘Captives, Children and Conversion: A Case from Late Nasrid Granada’, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 41/4 (1998), 455–7. For the Christian monastic orders that worked for the liberation of slaves, see Clissold, The Barbary Slaves, 107–29. For examples of monks mediating the release of slaves, see D. Polemis, ‘Απελευθέρωση φυλακισμένου στην Άνδρο κατά τον 16ο αιώνα’ [Prisoner Release in Andros During the 16th Century], Petalon 3 (1982), 81–96; for examples of monks trafficking slaves in the early sixteenth century, see Elizabeth Zachariadou, ‘Monks and Sailors under the Ottoman Sultans’, Oriente Moderno 20 (81), no. 1 (2001), 145–6. For house prices in Mykonos during this period, see Dimitropoulos, Η Μύκονος τον 17ο αιώνα, 159–61. For the use of the bill of exchange, see Markus A. Denzel, Handbook of World Exchange Rates, 1590–1914 (New York: Routledge, 2016). Also, for the problems of their dissemination even in trade transactions, mainly in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, see Vassilis Kremmidas, To εμπόριο της Πελοποννήσου στον 18ο αιώνα (1715–1795) [The Trade of Peloponnesus in the 18th Century (1715–1795)] (Athens:, F. Konstantinidis – K. Michalas, 1972), 120–3; Vassilis Kremmidas, Εμπορικές πρακτικές στοτέλος της Τουρκοκρατίας. Μυκονιάτες έμποροι

108

Dimitropoulos

receipts of such a security, taking into consideration that their trade was related to pirates’ booties? Was it therefore to be paid in cash? And was it not too much money to be carried by a helpless woman who was at risk of robbery? Or rather, since the money was coming from piracy, was there a net of protection against potential thieves? 5) At the end of the document there is a reference to ‘corsairs’ luck’. But who were those corsairs, whom the people of Mykonos, who interposed in the sale of slaves, considered as a potential risk? Were they Turkish pirates, the Greek ‘fellow artists’, or the Europeans who were active in Greek seas, some of whom had even permanently or occasionally settled in the island? On the other hand, were the islanders in danger from the corsairs, who were active under the protection of a European force, or from ‘pirates – freelancers’, who acted on their own account? Were the terms pirates and corsairs, which were delineated by later historiography, used in contemporary sources without conceptual distinction? In my opinion, questions like these, as well as many others that could possibly be raised, reveal the impact of piracy on many different aspects of the social and economic life of the islands.10 On the contrary, some views apparently adopted by the majority of the relevant literature fail to capture the nuances of the lives of the islanders during the Ottoman dominion. In this way, although the stereotypes that dominated the negotiation of the issue preserve a core portion of the truth, sometimes they excessively illuminate one side of things and leave in the darkness or even distort other aspects that are necessary for understanding a complex phenomenon. We will now briefly summarise some common views that have dominated the traditional Greek literature on the subject and which have now come to be widely regarded as more or less unquestionable assertions. 1) Foreign pirates, mainly Muslims, but Christians as well, who were active in the Greek seas were a plague for the islanders, because they systematically engaged in plunder, grabbing, looting and capturing the Christian inhabitants or those passing by, whom they then sold as slaves.

και πλοιοκτήτες [Commercial Practices at the End of Ottoman Rule: Mykoniates Traders and Shipowners] (Athens: Aegean Maritime Museum., 1993), 162–8. 10 For a general view of the phenomenon of piracy in the Greek seas during these times see Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η αρπαγή και οι κίνδυνοι στη θάλασσα: Πόλεμοι, κούρσος και πειρατεία στη Μεσόγειο του 18ου αιώνα’ [Plunder and Dangers in Greek Seas: Piracy in the Mediterranean During the 18th Century] in Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping 1700–1821] (Athens: Kedros Publications, 2013), 145–206, with references to older literature.

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

109

2)

The islanders lived in a lasting regime of terror and insecurity that resulted in either the fleeing and depopulation of the islands or the abandonment of coastal areas and withdrawal to places which provided visual cover or natural fortification.11 I believe views like these were components of larger explanatory patterns that aimed to emphasise the overall decline into which the Greek world fell after the Turkish occupation.12 This canvas was then embroidered with information, testimonies, sources and further documentary material that fuelled and strengthened the prevailing impression. This misleading, or we could say ‘militant’, approach of the pirate phenomenon led to the over-exploitation of some information and to underuse of other information that might be drawn from various sources. We will mention one example: In a series of letters in the mid-seventeenth century, the Capuchin monk Placide de Reims describes his stay and travels in the Aegean Islands in a vivid and elegant manner, while at the same time providing extremely interesting information about the lives of their inhabitants. In the following passage an activity of the women of Syros is highlighted:

11

12

One of the first Greek historians of modern times who supported this view was Pantelis Kontogiannis, Οι πειραταί και η Θάσος [Pirates and Thasos] (Thasos: n.p., 1995), 13–22, where he tries to justify it by examining the position of the settlements of Thasos. Since then, these views have been repeated a lot. For example, see Apostolos Vacalopoulos, Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού [A History of Modern Hellenism], vol. 2 (Thessaloniki: n.p., 1976), 117– 57; Stephanos Imellos, Η περί των πειρατών λαϊκή παράδοσις [The Pirates on Folk Tradition] (Athens: Filekpaideytiki Etaireia, 1968), 51–52; Alexandra Krandonelli, Ελληνική πειρατεία και κούρσος τον ΙΗ’ αιώνα και μέχρι την Ελληνική Επανάσταση [Greek Piracy and Privateering in the 18th Century and Until the Greek Revolution] (Athens: Estia, 1998), 309–10. For examples of the prevalence of the widespread view that the islanders lived in a constant state of terror because of the pirates, see Tryfon Konstantinidis, Πειρατεία, εισβολή και οι Έλληνες [Piracy, Incursion and the Greeks] (Athens: n.p., 1949), 7–8; Kostas Kerophilas, Οι κουρσάροι στην Ελλάδα [Corsairs in Greece] (Athens: Erinni 2002), 9–10; Nikos A. Kephalliniadis, Πειρατεία – Κουρσάροι Στο Αιγαίο [Piracy – Corsairs in the Aegean Sea] (Athens: Filippotis, 1984), 8–9; Nikolaos Foropoulos, ‘H θέση της Αστυπάλαιας κατά την διάρκεια της πειρατείας στο Αιγαίο’ [The Position of Astypalaea During Piracy in the Aegean Sea], Parnassos 41 (1999), 311. For the views expressed, see Apostolos Vacalopoulos, ‘La retraite des populations grecques vers des régions éloignées et montagneuses pendant la domination turque’, Balkan Studies 4 (1963), 265–76. See also, Vassilis Panagiotopoulos, ‘Η ‘αποχώρηση’ πληθυσμών από την πεδιάδα στο βουνό στα χρόνια της Τουρκοκρατίας. Ένας εξηγηματικός μύθος σύνθετων δημογραφικών φαινομένων’ [The Departure of Populations from the Plain to the Mountain During the Turkish Occupation: An Explaining Myth of Complicated Demographic Phenomena] in Conference Proceedings: The Rural World in the Mediterranean Area (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 1988), 203–5.

110

Dimitropoulos

These are the same women who are responsible for the making of the hardtack for pirates. Each of them has her own mill, where she grinds the barley supplied by the corsairs, something against the interests of Turks, since, otherwise, the pirates would not have been able to fight them. The distribution of the wheat from the pirates to women is of great interest. Whoever wants and pays for the hardtacks sends to the settlement his own people to inform them to be ready to go quickly to the port, as soon as the ship arrives. These poor women leave immediately for the port, having a bag in hand, and go to the sailors, who record the weight of the given wheat, and then the women return loaded, carrying the sack on their head. I was very puzzled with this way of dealing, but these women did this job happily, because they were convinced that they would be paid well. Indeed, except for that, they also profit from the amount received, as frequently they mix the given wheat with a certain quantity of barley. However, the pirates often realise it and they hold the hardtack without paying. Thus, these unfortunate women, in order to gain something, are exposed to unexpected events.13 The picture that emerges from Placide’s records seems to undermine the abovementioned stereotypes. The inhabitants of Syros and especially the women of the island are said to maintain close relationships with pirates. Instead of leaving, panicked, upon the appearance of a pirates’ vessel, they rush voluntarily to the port to undertake, for a fee, the milling of the wheat and provide hardtack for the pirate ships. Placide even argues that not only do the pirates not violently seize the goods or affect the work of locals, but they are actually deceived by the women of the island, who mix their wheat with barley of inferior value. Does this lack of fear, almost generalised and seen in the cooperation of the local population with the pirates, respond to the realities of the times? Is it closer to the truth than the prevailing stereotypes mentioned above? Was it specific to Syros because of the overwhelming majority of Catholics and its proximity to Tinos, which was under the rule of Venetians until 1715 and provided asylum to Christian pirates?14 Placide is definitely sympathetic towards 13 14

The letters were published in M. Foskolos and A. Fonsos, ‘Οι περιπέτειες ενός καπουτσίνου στο Αιγαίου του 17ου αιώνα (Μέρος Α΄)’ [The Adventures of a Capuchin in the Aegean of the 17th century (Part A)], Tiniaka Analecta 5 (2002), 304–5. The ambivalent mood of fear and cooperation is recorded in a document drafted in Santorini, an island of the Aegean Sea with a mixed Catholic and Orthodox population. In this document, representatives of the five ‘castles’ of the island ask the Catholic and Orthodox bishops and the abbot of the Jesuits ‘in case pirates’ ships appear, to go and cry in front of them and beg them’ not to harm their island, exaggerating their condition with

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

111

the pirates, because Capuchins were collaborating with them and enjoyed their generous cooperation. Reports, like the one below, which we read in the code of the Capuchins of Naxos, recommend a common practice: ‘this year (1666) the pirate Paul died at the monastery of the Annunciation of Sokkolani and he was buried inside the temple; before his death he gave to us a green silk fabric, which was placed in the chapel of the Virgin, and 30 piasters for the construction of the Monastery tank’.15 In parallel, it seems that they had secured immunity from the pirates’ ships in the most formal way. Typical is a reference to a notary document of the island of Naxos in 1734, where it is stated that the Jesuits had obtained a patent for a ship (sakoleva) of their ownership, which protected the ship from the raids of the corsairs of Malta.16 However, if the cooperation of locals with pirates was not limited to a few blameworthy and dubious individuals, as some approaches of the subject support, but had – on the contrary – the scale and scope described by Placide, could the other side, the rival, mainly be limited to the Turkish power, which was in a vicious war with the Christian pirates?17 Nevertheless, testimonies like that of Placide illustrate the fluidity of boundaries between the ambivalent forces and eventually the ambiguity of the roles of perpetrators and victims. And this complex network of relations was not an Aegean specificity. Fernard Braudel, speaking on piracy in the Mediterranean, assigns importance to the phenomenon in the following words: ‘The pillage does not belong just to one

15 16 17

a tragic manner; see Agamemnon Tselikas, Μαρτυρίες από τη Σαντορίνη (1573–1819): έκθεση ιστορικών εγγράφων [Testimonies from Santorini (1573–1819): Report of Historical Documents] (Athens: Cultural Centre, Megaro Gyzi-Santorini, 1985), 91, doc. 20. P. Zerlendis, Ιστορικά σημειώματα εκ του βιβλίου των εν Νάξω Καπουκίνων (1649–1753) [Historical Notes on the Book of the Naxos’ Capuchins (1649–1753)] (Ermoupolis: n.p., 1922), 35–36. Stefanos Psarras and Matteo Campagnolo, Ο συμβολαιογράφος της Νάξου Στέφανος Τ(ρ) ούμπινος (1712–1738) [The Notary of Naxos Stefanos T(r)oumpinos (1712–1738)] (Athens: Nomarhiaki Aytodioikisi Kykladon, 2010), 422–4, doc. 271. For the cooperation between locals and pirates, see Kremmidas, To εμπόριο της Πελοποννήσου, 105–7; Krandonelli, Ελληνική πειρατεία και κούρσος, 219; Ginio, ‘Piracy’, 138–9; Gelina Harlaftis, Ιστορία της ελληνόκτητης ναυτιλίας 19ος–20ός αιώνας [History of Greek-owned Shipping in the 19th–20th Century] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001), 62–65. For an example of integration of true or defamatory allegations about the cooperation with the corsairs in local controversies, see Elias Kolovos, ‘Ραγιάδες και Φράγκοι στην πύλη του σουλτάνου: η κοινωνία της Άνδρου το 1564 και η οθωμανική κεντρική διοίκηση’ [Ragiades and Franks in the Gate of Sultan: The Society of Andros in 1564 and the Ottoman Central Administration], Agkyra 2 (2004), 57, 80–81. For the fluidity concerning piracy, sometimes even of Christian or Muslim identity, see Elizabeth Zachariadou, ‘Changing Masters in the Aegean’, in Julian Chrysostomides, Charalambos Dendrinos and Jonathan Harris (eds), Conference Proceedings: The Greek Islands and the Sea (Camberley: Porphyrogenitus, 2004), 209–12.

112

Dimitropoulos

side, to a single team, to a single responsible, to a single guilty party. It is an endemic phenomenon. All, strong and weak, rich and poor, masters and cities, were caught in the gears of a machine that spread across the sea.’18 But let us return to what has been said about the abandonment of the coastal sites and the movement of insular settlements to landlocked and sheltered or hidden locations. Certainly, during the Ottoman rule, the inhabitants of the insular settlements lived in an environment mixed with violence, which was exercised both by the Ottoman sovereign and diverse other passing people or local gunmen.19 Numerous violent incidents – looting and plundering of small populations, but also attacks on insular countries  – are identified in the sources.20 Protective measures are also described, which demonstrate that fear and insecurity were aspects of daily life. The securing of the gates of the settlements during the night or the function of a surveillance system and prompt warning against threats coming from the sea through watchtowers are indicative of the feeling of danger that the islanders had.21 I think that these 18 19

20

21

Fernand Braudel, La Méditerranée et le Monde Méditerranéen à l’époque de Philippe II, vol. 2 (Paris: Librairie Armond Colin, 1982), 192. An extremely interesting artefact is monk Placide de Reims’s description of a visit of the Ottomans to Andros: see Markos Foskolos and Antonios Fonsos, ‘Οι περιπέτειες ενός καπουτσίνου’ [The Adventures of a Capuchin], 390–3; see also Zerlendis Ιστορικά σημειώματα 34. On the other hand, the way the captains of the passing ships resolved the disputes between Orthodox and Catholics is also interesting; see Joseph Pitton de Tournefort, Relation d’un voyage du Levant, vol. 1 (Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1717), 176–7. On insecurity caused by Christian corsairs, see Géraud Poumarède, Pour en finir avec la Croisade. Mythes et réalités de la lutte contre les Turks aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles (Paris: PU de France, 2004), 481–5. See a detailed description of similar incidents by Alexandra Krandonelli, Ιστορία της πειρατείας στους μέσους χρόνους της Τουρκοκρατίας 1538–1699 [History of Piracy in the Middle Era of Ottoman Rule 1538–1699] (Athens: Estia, 1991), 307–78. What is typical, is the pillage of the town of Andros by Creveliers in 1670 (see Demetrios Pashalis, Ιστορία της νήσου Άνδρου [History of the Island of Andros], vol. 2 [Athens: Typothito/Dardanos, 2004], 294–6), the destruction of Aggidia village and attacks against the town (Chora) of Naxos during the years between 1674 and 1678 (see Zerlendis, Ιστορικά σημειώματα, 52, 67–68; Michalis Markopolis, ‘Πειρατικαί επιδρομαί κατά της Νήσου Νάξου’ [Pirate Raids against Naxos Island], Estia 27 [1893], 107–9). See also the testimony of Robert Saulger, Histoire nouvelle des anciens Ducs et autres souverains de l’ Archipel (Paris: n.p., 1698), 310–24, where this dual relationship of acceptance and fear, which bound the islanders with some famous pirates such as Creveliers active in the area, is recorded. See Krandonelli, Ιστορία της πειρατείας στους μέσους χρόνους, 400–411. On the coastguard system of Tinos during the Venetian era, see Nikolaos Moshonas, ‘Η οργάνωσις των ακτοφρουρών της Τήνου υπό του Βενετού συνδίκου Ιερωνύμου da Lezze (1621)’ [The Organisation of the Coastguard of Tinos under the Venetian Administrator Jerome da Lezze (1621)], Epetiris Etairias Kykladikon Meleton 5 (1965–6), 668–87.

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

113

conditions prevented the establishment of isolated, unfortified settlements in littoral locations.22 But if somebody examines the towns of the islands of the Cyclades at that time, he will notice that several of them were indeed built well away from the sea.23 At the same time there were large settlements located by the sea or very close to it (for example the town of Mykonos, the old town [Chora] of Andros, Skaros of Santorini, Naousa of Paros island, Saint Nicolas of Tinos, etc.). Recent studies based on field observations showed that the towns of the islands were not hidden from the sea, and that they had a direct visual contact both with the sea routes of the passing ships and between them, in the case of neighbouring islands.24 Therefore, it seems that the priority for the main settlements was not just distance from the sea, but the selection of a location that would facilitate the activities of the inhabitants and serve in the defence and control of both the mainland and the sea. Moreover, the hiding of settlements from pirates was actually meaningless, taking into consideration that the pirates knew the entire Aegean area very well. They were therefore perfectly aware not only of the settlements, but even of the uninhabited islets of the Aegean Sea.25 Furthermore, the widespread view that speaks of the devastation of the islands in the years that followed the Turkish conquest due to the actions of the pirates and the Turkish oppression raises serious problems in its documentation as well.26 In principle, it seems that certain islands, such as Milos, 22

23

24 25 26

This point is also highlighted by Bernard Randolph, The Present State of the Islands in the Archipelago (Oxford: n.p., 1687), 8, where he states that unlike Chora (the town), which was located close to the sea and had gates closed at night for fear of pirates, the small villages of the island were perched in the mountains at dominant points that allowed them to be prepared by possible external dangers; see Imellos, Η περί των πειρατών λαϊκή παράδοσις, 51. In some contemporary sources, the fear of pirates is mentioned as the main cause of the resettlement of the population away from the sea. For example, see the report of Argyrios Filippidis in 1815, in Panermos of Skopelos: Theodosis Sperantsas, Τα περισωθέντα έργα του Αργύρη Φιλιππίδη. Μερική Γεωγραφία  – Βιβλίον Ηθικόν [The Preserved Works of Argiris Filippidis. Some Geography – Moral Book] (Athens: n.p., 1978), 202. Nikos Belavilas, Λιμάνια και οικισμοί στο Αρχιπέλαγος της πειρατείας, 15ος–19ος αι. [Ports and Settlements in the Archipelago of Piracy, 15th to 19th Centuries] (Athens: Odysseus, 1997), 100–102. Belavilas, Λιμάνια και οικισμοί, 74–75. This view was supported by Frederick W. Hasluck, ‘Depopulation in the Aegean Islands and the Turkish Conquest’, The Annual of the British School at Athens 17 (1910–11), 151– 81. This view was later adopted by nearly all Greek literature; see Vacalopoulos, Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού, 117–25. Apostolos Vacalopoulos, ‘Η θέση των Ελλήνων και οι δοκιμασίες τους υπό τους Τούρκους’ [The Position of Greeks and Their Tribulations under the Turks], Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Έθνους [History of the Greek Nation], vol. 10 (Athens: Ekdotiki Athinon 1974), 90–91. Demetrios Pashalis, ‘Κατάκτησις των Κυκλάδων υπό των

114

Dimitropoulos

Kimolos, Paros or Mykonos, experienced some type of economic prosperity as centres of piratical action and trade of spoils.27 In parallel, as proved by notarial documents of the time, individuals who practised piracy, often of Dalmatian or Italian origin, had settled in the Cyclades.28 They conducted financial transactions, dealt with buying and selling properties, had relations with the community authorities and were prestigious and respectable members of the local communities, with a good reputation. For example, the pirate Geronymos Dazara from the Dalmatian Zara  – according to the report of a Catholic priest in 1675 – was forty-four years old and permanently installed in Mykonos. During the period between 1666 and 1668, he bought at least eighteen houses, vineyards and mills, spending significant sums of money.29 On the other hand, the pirates had no rivals. In the Cyclades, there was no armed force of military type, there were no Janissaries. On the larger islands, only a few Turks were permanent residents who held the duty of policing the populations; they were more attracted by the prestige of the Ottoman rule than by the power of arms. However, they could do nothing against armed men who had no respect for the prestige of this power. On the contrary, they lived in fear and tried to ensure their rescue in case of a piratical raid by building bonds with the Catholic Church. According to the testimonies of travellers, Catholic priests and European consuls, as well as the tax records of the Turkish administration and the Christian communities – and despite the fact that these sources do not record with accuracy the exact number of the islands’ population – the islands sustained sizeable populations at the height of piratical aggression. We will make use of some numerical data. According to the available data per island during

27

28 29

Τούρκων’ [Conquest of Cyclades by Turks], Epetiris Etairias Kykladikon Meleton 1 (1961), 225, where relevant literature can be found. This view refutes Slot, Archipelagus turbatus, vol. 1, 286–9; also see Michel Fondenay, ‘L’Empire Ottoman et le risqué corsair au XVIIe siècle’, Actes du IIe Colloque International d’Histoire, Economies Méditerranéennes Equilibres et Intercommunications XIIe–XIXe siècles, vol. 1 (Athens: Centre de Recherches Néohelléniques, 1985), 448–53; Dimitris Dimitropoulos ‘Μαρτυρίες για τον πληθυσμό των νησιών του Αιγαίου, 15ος–αρχές 19ου αιώνα’ [Testimonies on the Population of the Aegean Islands, 15th–Early 19th Century], Τετράδια Εργασίας [Workbooks] 27 (2004), 100–101. In these cases the presence of pirates did not have only one view. Characteristically, the secretary of the Dutch Embassy in Istanbul, Jacobus Bysantius Hochepied, writing in his diary about his visit to Milos on 4 July 1678, indicated that the island had become an assembly centre of pirates and of buying and selling their spoils, and at the same time he noted that the inhabitants suffered because of the pirates, as they were often stealing their sheep; see Ben J. Slot, ‘Ολλανδοί πρόξενοι Μήλου-Κιμώλου’ [Dutch Consuls of Milos-Kimolos], Kimoliaka 8 (1976), 185–6. Dimitropoulos, Η Μύκονος τον 17ο αιώνα, 418; Slot, Archipelagus turbatus, 29. Dimitropoulos, Η Μύκονος τον 17ο αιώνα, 418–19.

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

115

the late seventeenth century – that is, the pirates’ peak period – the estimated total population of the Cyclades Islands was 70,000 inhabitants, whereas the whole region of the Peloponnesus numbered 1,760,000 inhabitants.30 The viable habitation of the islands during the booming years of piracy is further endorsed by the comparison of their population in later times. Indicatively, on the eve of the Greek Revolution of 1821, the islands of the Cyclades are estimated to have had around 110,000 inhabitants; the first official census of 1861 recorded a population of 118,130 inhabitants, of whom 17,939 lived in Hermoupolis of Syros, which received an influx of refugees after 1821, whereas 120 years later, in the census of 1981, 88,458 inhabitants were counted.31 Another issue raised relates to the ambiguity and sometimes the arbitrariness which can characterise the terms and concepts used to describe the piratical phenomenon. As a result, groups permanently settled in a location, and having acquired a form of statehood like the Saracens or the Maltese – or groups occasionally formed in order to grab goods – are confused with armed groups which acted in an organised manner, with the explicit support or mere tolerance of a sovereign state.32 Apart from the general difficulty of distinguishing between pirates and corsairs – although there was a clear distinction and legal 30

31

32

The Cyclades’ population estimate is based on information collected from a variety of sources from that period; for relevant sources, see Dimitropoulos, ‘Μαρτυρίες’, 171–238. For Peloponnesus, see V. Panagiotopoulos, Πληθυσμοί και οικισμοί της Πελοποννήσου 13ος–18ος αιώνας [Populations and Settlements of Peloponnesus 13th–18th centuries] (Athens: Historical Archive – Commercial Bank of Greece, 1985), 141–3. See, respectively, A. Mamoukas, Τα κατά την αναγέννησιν της Ελλάδος [During the Regeneration of Greece], vol. 11 (Athens:n.p., 1852), 258–61 (document of I. Kapodistrias of 10/22 November 1818); Yannis. Bafounis (ed.), Στατιστική της Ελλάδος Πληθυσμός του έτους 1861 [Greek Population Statistics of the Year 1861] (Athens: EMNE, 1991), 3, 13; National Hellenic Statistical Authority, Πραγματικός πληθυσμός της Ελλάδος κατά την απογραφή της 5 Απριλίου 1981 [Actual Greek Population According to the Census of the 5th of April 1981] (Athens, 1982), 127. From the rich literature on the organisation of ‘privateering’, mainly in Malta and Barbary, see Alberto Tenenti, Naufrages Corsaires et Assurances maritimes à Vénice 1592–1609 (Paris: SEVPEN, 1959), 27–45; Alberto Tenenti, Piracy and the Decline of Venice 1580–1615 (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967), 3–86; Peter Earle, Corsairs of Malta and Barbary (London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1970), 23–191; George Stephanides, Aspects du risqué maritime aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles (Athens: Themelio, 1986), 112–97; Michel Fontenay, ‘L’empire ottoman et le risqué corsair au XVII siècle’, Revue d’ Histoire Moderne et Contemporaine 32 (1985), 185–208; M. Fontenay, ‘Corsaires de la foi ou rentiers du sol? Les Chevaliers de Malte dans le corso méditerranéen au XVIIe siècle’, Revue d’ Histoire Moderne et Contemporaine 35 (1988), 361–84; M. Fontenay, ‘La place de la course dans l’économie portuaire: l’exemple de Malte et des portes barbaresques’, Annales E.S.C. 43 (1988), 1321–47; Molly Greene, Catholic Pirates and Greek Merchants: A Maritime History of the Early Modern Mediterranean (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010), 52–67, Joshua W. White, ‘“It is Not Halal to Raid Them”: Piracy and Law in the Seventeenth-century

116

Dimitropoulos

recognition33 – observed in contemporary sources and enhanced by the role play of individuals involved, equally problematic are the characterisations of events and persons who played a key role in them.34 Thus the definition of an action as warfare or piracy is mainly determined by the viewpoint and position of the person who attributes it. A similar practice was followed later: rendering the quality of pirate to people serving in state armies, who had high-ranking positions and participated in acts of war. A typical example is Barbarossa, whose action during the 1530s in the Aegean and Crete is called piratical and who identifies himself as a pirate, although he had the rank of Pasha Kapoudan at the time and acted formally under the orders of the Ottoman Empire.35 Furthermore, the raids of the Ottoman fleet on the Cretan coastline are often condemned as piratical, although they were held within the framework of the Venetian-Turkish War,36 while the flotilla of Ali Pasha of Ioannina, set up in the coast of Epirus,

33 34

35

36

Ottoman Mediterranean’, in Harlaftis, Dimitropoulos and Starkey (eds), Corsairs and Pirates, 83–100. For the distinction between the terms pirate and corsair in Greek seas, see Dionisios A. Zakynthinos, ‘Corsaires et pirates dans les mers grecques au temps de la domination turque’, L’Hellénisme Contemporain 10 (1939), 9-10; Greene, Catholic Pirates, 53. See Zakynthinos, ‘Corsaires et pirates’, 9. On the subject see also Kremmidas, To εμπόριο της Πελοποννήσου [The Trade of Peloponnesus], 97–98; Krandonelli, Ελληνική πειρατεία και κούρσος [Greek Piracy and Privateering], 21–25; Belavilas, Λιμάνια και οικισμοί [Ports and Settlements], 15–16; Markos Foskolos, ‘Τήνος και πειρατεία κατά τους μέσους χρόνους’ [Tinos and Piracy During the Middle Ages], Πρακτικά της Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης: Τήνος και Θάλασσα [Proceedings of the Scientific Meeting: Tinos and Sea] (Athens: Etaireia Tiniakon Meleton, 1997), 48; N. Vatin, ‘L’Empire Ottoman et la piraterie en 1559–1560’ in Elizabeth Zachariadou (ed.), The Kapudan Pasha, His Office and His Domain (Rethymnon: Crete University Press, 2002), 370–3. See, for example, Spyridon Argyros, Η πειρατεία από του 1500 π.Χ. έως το 1860. Ιστορία και θρύλος [Piracy from 1500 BC until 1860. History and Legend] (Athens: n.p., 1963), 81–89; Alexandra Krandonelli, Ιστορία της πειρατείας στους πρώτους χρόνους της Τουρκοκρατίας 1390– 1538 [History of Piracy in the First Era of Ottoman Rule 1390–1538] (Athens: Estia, 1985), 200–209. See also D. Loupis, ‘Η πειρατεία στα οθωμανικά ναυτικά κείμενα (16ος–17ος αι.)’ [Piracy in the Ottoman Nautical Texts (16th–17th cent.)] in Gharis Kalliga and Alexis Malliaris (eds), Πρακτικά συμποσίου: Πειρατές και κουρσάροι [Symposium Proceedings: Pirates and Corsairs] (Athens: Estia, 2003), 86–89, for the views of Muslims about Hayreddin Barbarossa. For Barbarossa, who had officially served as Kapoudan Pasha from 1533 until 1534, see Godfrey Fisher, Barbary Legend: War, Trade and Piracy in North Africa 1415–1830 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1957), 41–65; Ernie Bradford, The Sultan’s Admiral: The Life of Barbarossa (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968); A. Gallota, ‘Khayr al-Din Pasha’, Encyclopédie de l’Islam, vol. 4 (Leiden-Paris: Brill, 1978), 1189. Theocharis Detorakis, ‘Πειρατικές επιδρομές στην Κρήτη κατά την περίοδο της Βενετοκρατίας’ [Piratical Raids in Crete During the Venetian Period], Kritiki Estia 2 (1988), 136–9.

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

117

is considered piratical as well.37 A similar ambiguity is to be found in the labels attached to Western corsairs, who sometimes in wartime acted officially under the auspices of governmental forces; however, they were still characterised as pirates. We face the same problem with the classification of ‘raids’ that Lambros Katsonis made during the late eighteenth century with his ships in the Aegean Sea.38 Finally, and with some flexibility, individuals conducting robberies ashore are included in the general category of pirates, although contemporary sources characterised them as ‘thieves’.39 A later attempt to attach some general, invariable features to the terms of ‘pirate’ or ‘corsair’ is often seen in the primary sources, which show that the attitude of people towards those involved in piracy and privateering varied depending on the time and the circumstances. For example, in 1686 Stefanakis Armakolas from Milos, according to an official testimony, complained about Antonis Bernardakis’s behaviour, because although he regarded him as a ‘nice person and a good corsair’, he had abandoned the privateering felucca, to which he was appointed by the former.40 In 1700, the botanist and researcher of the Aegean Sea, Tournefort, wrote that the ‘famous pirates of the Aegean had nothing flagitious, except the name of corsair’; ‘they were remarkable people with virtues that simply followed the customs of the times’.41 In 1788, Michael Tournavitis, a trader established in Trieste representing the commercial interest of the island of Hydra, refers to L. Katsonis in one of his reports not as a legitimate privateer but as a pirate who was chasing the unfortunate Greeks.42 In June 1833, the court of the town of Nafplion in the Peloponnese decided that 37 38

39

40 41 42

On the flotilla of Ali Pasha, see Argyros, Η πειρατεία, 211–13 and Krandonelli, Ελληνική πειρατεία και κούρσος, 243–4. For Katsonis, see Krandonelli, Ελληνική πειρατεία και κούρσος, 133–62; Olga Katsiardi-Hering, ‘Μύθος και ιστορία. Ο Λάμπρος Κατσώνης, οι χρηματοδότες του και η πολιτική τακτική’ [Myth and History: Lambros Katsonis, His Donors and the Political Policy], Rodonia Honor to M.I. Manousaka, vol. 1 (Rethymnon: Crete University Press, 1994), 195–214. Indicative is a note of 1812 written by the Elders of the town of Gavrio, in the island of Andros, where they stated that ‘thieves coming from Mani (region in south-western Peloponnese)’, kidnapped Lambros Katsonis and ransacked his house. However, it was the Turks of the town of Karystos in the southern part of Evia island who finally released him; see Pashalis, Ιστορία της νήσου Άνδρου, 303. There is a similar note in a parish book in the island of Kimolos, referring to a raid already known from another source, conducted by the inhabitants of Mani in the Peloponnese, with the following words: ‘On the 17th of February of 1794, during the carnival, on Friday dawn, three hours before the daylight, we were invaded by thieves who left us only with our clothes’; see A. Miliarakis, Κίμωλος [Kimolos] (Athens: n.p., 1901), 30, 33. See Katsouros, Κουρσάροι και σκλάβοι, 20, doc. 7. Tournefort, Relation d’un voyage du Levant, 176. Katsiardi-Hering, ‘Μύθος και ιστορία’, 200.

118

Dimitropoulos

the term ‘pirate’, which Andreas Papadopoulos Vretos used against Emmanuel Antoniades through the Kapodistrian newspaper Hellenic Mirror, constituted not a slander but a personal insult and therefore sentenced him to a fine of 500 piasters.43 The attribution of a positive or negative connotation, the praise or scorn of pirates’ actions, is a contradiction that often emerges in the discussion on pirates and corsairs. It often depends on the angle of reading, and sometimes on the adaptation to the needs of the interpretative forms. According to one point of view, the pirates were either Turks or Western Europeans, but in all cases foreigners, aiming at suppressing the Greek island populations, assaulted them and stole their money and goods. Under this logic, piracy is a phenomenon alien to the locals, as the latter suffered its tragic consequences. The activity of Christian European pirates in the Greek seas is treated here with a certain caution, because on the one hand, their actions against Turks brought them into the pantheon of continuous resistance against the conqueror, whereas on the other hand, the fact that they were not Greeks classified them as foreigners who permanently wronged the Greeks.44 Another approach reads Greek piracy as a heroic act of resistance against the foreign Turkish invader. The pirates here are the equivalent of the bandits at sea, poor Greek patriots, fearless young men, who could not endure oppression and poverty and turned to the sea in order to avenge their Turkish oppressors.45 Under this perspective, Greek pirates did not turn against Greeks  – only in exceptional, critical cases – while the experience they acquired in arms and 43

44 45

See A. Papadopoulos Vretos, Ιστορική έκθεσις της εφημερίδος ‘Ο Ελληνικός Καθρέπτης’ εκδιδομένης Ελληνιστί και γαλλιστί εις Ναύπλιον, από τον Μάιον μήνα του 1832, μέχρι του Ιανουαρίου του 1833 [Historical Report of the Newspaper ‘The Greek Mirror’ Issued in Greek and French in Nafplion, from May of 1832, up to January of 1833] (Athens: n.p., 1839), 44–47, 76–79, where we can find the reasoning of this judgement. According to this view, the Christian pirates seem guilty, as ‘they never could and probably … didn’t want to coordinate their action and develop a united strategic attack against the Ottoman Empire’; see Krandonelli, Ιστορία της πειρατείας στους μέσους χρόνους, 14. As is characteristically noted by Alexandra Krandonelli, the Greeks were forced to practise piracy and slave trading due to the lack of castles and safety. What is interesting is that some Greek historians, who are well aware of the phenomenon of Greek piracy, treat it in a rather awkward manner. For example, they argue that Greeks could not build ships suitable for piracy, and that they simply worked as crew on the ships of foreign pirates; see Alexandra Krandonelli, ‘Νέες ειδήσεις για την ελληνική πειρατεία στα τέλη του ΙΖ΄ αιώνα’ [News about Greek Piracy at the End of XVII Century], Thesaurismata  24 (1994), 286. However, in the pages that follow, Krandonelli goes on to express an absolutely opposite opinion, which contradicts what she admits elsewhere in her study; for example, see Krandonelli, ‘Νέες ειδήσεις για την ελληνική πειρατεία’ [News About Greek Piracy], 291.

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

119

their small vessels were employed afterwards in the cause of the national liberation, as it was considered that they had either prepared the revolution of 1821 or participated in it. However, the fact is that piracy, intertwined with legends and traditions, has created its own charming mythology. The result was a blending of this mythology with real facts, making the distinction between the myth and the historical facts very difficult. Be that as it may, and despite the abovementioned difficulties, particularly during the past decades a new tendency has emerged in the field of Greek historiography. Emphasis on archival sources and ongoing research point out the exit from mythology and encourage a critical outlook on the issue of piracy in the Aegean Sea. Translated from the Greek by Thaleia Spanou Bibliography Argyros Spyridon, Η πειρατεία από του 1500 π.Χ. έως το 1860. Ιστορία και θρύλος [Piracy from 1500 BC until 1860. History and Legend] (Athens: n.p., 1963). Bafounis Yannis (ed.), Στατιστική της Ελλάδος Πληθυσμός του έτους 1861 [Greek Population Statistics of the Year 1861] (Athens: EMNE, 1991). Belavilas Nikos, Λιμάνια και οικισμοί στο Αρχιπέλαγος της πειρατείας, 15ος–19ος αι. [Ports and Settlements in the Archipelago of Piracy, 15th to 19th Centuries] (Athens: Odysseus, 1997). Bradford Ernie, The Sultan’s Admiral: The Life of Barbarossa (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968). Braudel Fernand, La Méditerranée et le Monde Méditerranéen à l’époque de Philippe II, vol. 2 (Paris: Librairie Armond Colin, 1982). Clissold Stephen, The Barbary Slaves (London: Paul Elek, 1977). Davis Robert C., Esclaves Chrétiens, maîtres Musulmans: L’esclavage blanc en Méditerranée (1500–1800) (Cahors: Éditions Jacqueline Chambon, 2006), 153–6. Denzel Markus A., Handbook of World Exchange Rates, 1590–1914 (New York: Routledge, 2016). Detorakis Theocharis, ‘Πειρατικές επιδρομές στην Κρήτη κατά την περίοδο της Βενετοκρατίας’ [Piratical Raids in Crete During the Venetian Period], Kritiki Estia 2 (1988), 136-51. Dimitropoulos Dimitris, ‘Μαρτυρίες για τον πληθυσμό των νησιών του Αιγαίου, 15ος–αρχές 19ου αιώνα’ [Testimonies on the Population of the Aegean Islands, 15th–Early 19th Century], Τετράδια Εργασίας 27 (2004).

120

Dimitropoulos

Dimitropoulos Dimitris, Η Μύκονος τον 17ο αιώνα. Γαιοκτητικές σχέσεις και οικονομικές συναλλαγές [Mykonos in the 17th Century: Land-ownership and Financial Transactions] (Athens: Institute of Neohellenic Research, 1997). Earle Peter, Corsairs of Malta and Barbary (London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1970). Fisher Godfrey, Barbary Legend: War, Trade and Piracy in North Africa 1415–1830 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1957). Fodor Pal, ‘Piracy, Ransom, Slavery and Trade: French Participation in the Liberation of the Ottoman Slaves from Malta during the 1620s’, Turcica 33 (2001), 119–34. Fontenay Michel, ‘Le Maghreb barbaresque et l’esclavage méditerranéen aux XVe– XVIIe siècles’, Les Cahiers de Tunisie 44/157–8 (1991), 7–43. Fontenay Michel, ‘Corsaires de la foi ou rentiers du sol? Les Chevaliers de Malte dans le corso méditerranéen au XVIIe siècle’, Revue d’Histoire Moderne et Contemporaine 35 (1988), 361–84. Fontenay Michel, ‘La place de la course dans l’économie portuaire: l’exemple de Malte et des portes barbaresques’, Annales E.S.C. 43 (1988), 1321-47. Fontenay Michel, ‘L’Empire Ottoman et le risqué corsair au XVIIe siècle’, Actes du IIe Colloque International d’Histoire, Economies Méditerranéennes Equilibres et Intercommunications XIIe–XIXe siècles, vol. 1 (Athens: Centre de Recherches Néohelléniques, 1985), 429-59. Foropoulos Nikolaos, ‘Η θέση της Αστυπάλαιας κατά την διάρκεια της πειρατείας στο Αιγαίο’ [The Position of Astypalaea During Piracy in the Aegean Sea], Parnassos 41 (1999), 326-34. Foskolos Markos and Antonios Fonsos, ‘Οι περιπέτειες ενός καπουτσίνου στο Αιγαίου του 17ου αιώνα (Μέρος Α΄)’ [The Adventures of a Capuchin in the Aegean of the 17th century (Part A)], Tiniaka Analecta 5 (2002), 235-400. Foskolos Markos, ‘Τήνος και πειρατεία κατά τους μέσους χρόνους’ [Tinos and Piracy During the Middle Ages], Πρακτικά της Επιστημονικής Συνάντησης: Τήνος και Θάλασσα [Proceedings of the Scientific Meeting: Tinos and Sea] (Athens: Etaireia Tiniakon Meleton,1997), 47-80. Ginio Eyal, ‘Piracy and Redemption in the Aegean Sea During the First Half of the Eighteenth Century’, Turcica 33 (2001), 135–47. Greene Molly, Catholic Pirates and Greek Merchants: A Maritime History of the Early Modern Mediterranean (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010). Hakan Erdem Y., Slavery in the Ottoman Empire and Its Demise, 1800–1909 (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1996). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Η αρπαγή και οι κίνδυνοι στη θάλασσα: Πόλεμοι, κούρσος και πειρατεία στη Μεσόγειο του 18ου αιώνα’ [Plunder and Dangers in Greek Seas: Piracy in the Mediterranean During the 18th Century] in Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping 1700–1821] (Athens: Kedros Publications, 2013), 145–206.

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

121

Harlaftis Gelina, Ιστορία της ελληνόκτητης ναυτιλίας 19ος–20ός αιώνας [History of Greekowned Shipping in the 19th–20th Century] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001). Hasluck F.W., ‘Depopulation in the Aegean Islands and the Turkish Conquest’, The Annual of the British School at Athens 17 (1910–11), 151–81. Imellos Stephanos, Η περί των πειρατών λαϊκή παράδοσις [The Pirates on Folk Tradition] (Athens: Filekpaideytiki Etaireia, 1968). Katsiardi-Hering Olga, ‘Μύθος και ιστορία. Ο Λάμπρος Κατσώνης, οι χρηματοδότες του και η πολιτική τακτική’ [Myth and History: Lambros Katsonis, His Donors and the Political Policy], Rodonia Honor to M.I. Manousaka, vol. 1 (Rethymnon: Crete University Press, 1994), 195–214. Kephalliniadis Nikos A., Πειρατεία – Κουρσάροι Στο Αιγαίο [Piracy – Corsairs in the Aegean Sea] (Athens:, Filippotis, 1984). Kerophilas Kostas, Οι κουρσάροι στην Ελλάδα [Corsairs in Greece] (Athens: Erinni 2002). Kolovos Elias, ‘Ραγιάδες και Φράγκοι στην πύλη του σουλτάνου: η κοινωνία της Άνδρου το 1564 και η οθωμανική κεντρική διοίκηση’ [Ragiades and Franks in the Gate of Sultan: The Society of Andros in 1564 and the Ottoman Central Administration], Agkyra 2 (2004), 55-88. Konstantinidis Tryfon, Πειρατεία, εισβολή και οι Έλληνες [Piracy, Incursion and the Greeks] (Athens: n.p., 1949). Koutzakiotis George, ‘Corsairing and Slave Trading in the Cyclades During the Late Seventeenth Century’ in Gelina Harlaftis, Dimitris Dimitropoulos and David J. Starkey (eds), Corsairs and Pirates in the Eastern Mediterranean, Fifteenth–Nineteenth Centuries (Athens: AdVenture SA, 2016), 55–62. Krandonelli Alexandra, Ελληνική πειρατεία και κούρσος τον ΙΗ’ αιώνα και μέχρι την Ελληνική Επανάσταση [Greek Piracy and Privateering in the 18th Century and Until the Greek Revolution] (Athens: Estia, 1998). Krandonelli Alexandra, ‘Νέες ειδήσεις για την ελληνική πειρατεία στα τέλη του ΙΖ΄ αιώνα’ [News about Greek Piracy at the End of XVII Century], Thesaurismata 24 (1994), 286-93. Krandonelli Alexandra, Ιστορία της πειρατείας στους μέσους χρόνους της Τουρκοκρατίας 1538– 1699 [History of Piracy in the Middle Era of Ottoman Rule 1538–1699] (Athens: Estia, 1991). Krandonelli Alexandra, Ιστορία της πειρατείας στους πρώτους χρόνους της Τουρκοκρατίας 1390–1538 [History of Piracy in the First Era of Ottoman Rule 1390–1538] (Athens: Estia, 1985). Kremmidas Vassilis, Εμπορικές πρακτικές στο τέλος της Τουρκοκρατίας. Μυκονιάτες έμποροι και πλοιοκτήτες [Commercial Practices at the End of Ottoman Rule: Mykoniates Traders and Shipowners] (Athens: Aegean Maritime Museum, 1993).

122

Dimitropoulos

Kremmidas Vassilis, To εμπόριο της Πελοποννήσου στον 18ο αιώνα (1715–1795) [The Trade of Peloponnesus in the 18th Century (1715–1795)] (Athens:, F. Konstantinidis – K. Michalas, 1972). Marin Manuela and Rachid El Hour, ‘Captives, Children and Conversion: A Case from Late Nasrid Granada’, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 41/4 (1998), 453-73. Markopolis Michalis, ‘Πειρατικαί επιδρομαί κατά της Νήσου Νάξου’ [Pirate Raids against Naxos Island], Estia 27 (1893), 107-110. Panagiotopoulos Vassilis, Πληθυσμοί και οικισμοί της Πελοποννήσου 13ος–18ος αιώνας [Populations and Settlements of Peloponnesus 13th–18th centuries] (Athens: Historical Archive – Commercial Bank of Greece, 1985). Pashalis Demetrios, ‘Κατάκτησις των Κυκλάδων υπό των Τούρκων’ [Conquest of Cyclades by Turks], Proceedings of Cycladic Studies, vol. 1 (1961), 215-233. Pashalis Demetrios, Ιστορία της νήσου Άνδρου [History of the Island of Andros], vol. 2 (Athens: Typothito/Dardanos, 2004). Pitton de Tournefort Joseph, Relation d’un voyage du Levant, vol. 1 (Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1717). Polemis Dimitris, ‘Απελευθέρωση φυλακισμένου στην Άνδρο κατά τον 16ο αιώνα’ [Prisoner Release in Andros During the 16th Century], Petalon 3 (1982), 81–96. Poumarède Géraud, Pour en finir avec la Croisade. Mythes et réalités de la lutte contre les Turks aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles (Paris: PU de France, 2004). Psarras Stefanos and Matteo Campagnolo, Ο συμβολαιογράφος της Νάξου Στέφανος Τ(ρ)ούμπινος (1712–1738) [The Notary of Naxos Stefanos T(r)oumpinos (1712–1738)] (Athens: Nomarhiaki Aytodioikisi Kykladon,2010). Randolph Bernard, The Present State of the Islands in the Archipelago (Oxford: n.p., 1687). Saulger Robert, Histoire nouvelle des anciens Ducs et autres souverains de l’Archipel (Paris: n.p., 1698). Slot Ben J., Archipelagus turbatus: Les Cyclades entre colonisation latine et occupation ottomane c.1500–1718, vol. 1 (Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1982). Slot Ben J., ‘Ολλανδοί πρόξενοι Μήλου-Κιμώλου’ [Dutch Consuls of Milos-Kimolos], Kimoliaka 8 (1976). Sperantsas Theodosis, Τα περισωθέντα έργα του Αργύρη Φιλιππίδη. Μερική Γεωγραφία  – Βιβλίον Ηθικόν [The Preserved Works of Argiris Filippidis. Some Geography – Moral Book] (Athens: n.p., 1978). Stephanides George, Aspects du risqué maritime aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles (Athens: Themelio 1986). Tenenti Alberto, Piracy and the Decline of Venice 1580–1615 (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967).

Piracy in the Aegean SEA

123

Tenenti Alberto, Naufrages Corsaires et Assurances maritimes à Vénice 1592–1609 (Paris: SEVPEN, 1959). Tselikas Andreas, Μαρτυρίες από τη Σαντορίνη (1573–1819): έκθεση ιστορικών εγγράφων [Testimonies from Santorini (1573–1819): Report of Historical Documents] (Athens: Cultural Centre, Megaro Gyzi-Santorini, 1985). Vacalopoulos Apostolos, Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού [A History of Modern Hellenism], vol. 2 (Thessaloniki: Herodotos, 1976). Vacalopoulos Apostolos, ‘La retraite des populations grecques vers des régions éloignées et montagneuses pendant la domination turque’, Balkan Studies 4 (1963), 265–76. Zachariadou Elizabeth, ‘Changing Masters in the Aegean’, in Julian Chrysostomides, Charalambos Dendrinos and Jonathan Harris (eds), Conference Proceedings: The Greek Islands and the Sea (Camberley: Porphyrogenitus, 2004), 199-212. Zachariadou Elizabeth (ed.), The Kapudan Pasha, His Office and His Domain (Rethymnon: Crete University Press, 2002). Zachariadou Elizabeth, ‘Monks and Sailors under the Ottoman Sultans’, Oriente Moderno 20 (81), no. 1 (2001), 139-47. Zakynthinos Dionisios A., ‘Corsaires et pirates dans les mers grecques au temps de la domination turque’, L’Hellenisme Contemporain 10 (1939), 1-48 (reprint).

Chapter 6

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century: Introducing the Black Sea Historical Statistics, 1812–1914 Alexandra Papadopoulou and Socrates Petmezas 1

Introduction1

This chapter aims to introduce to the academic community the ‘Black Sea Historical Statistics, 1812–1914’ (BSHS), a new database system on the commercial and shipping development of the Black Sea port cities, focusing mostly but not exclusively on the grain trade during the ‘long’ nineteenth century.2 Historical statistics such as BSHS constitute a valuable resource for studying economic history and other disciplines and is one of the main products of the larger international and interdisciplinary project ‘The Black Sea and its port-cities, 1774–1914. Development, convergence and linkages with the global economy’ (the ‘Black Sea project’) which started in 2012 and ended in 2016.3 1 Based on Socrates Petmezas and Alexandra Papadopoulou, The Development of the Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach (Black Sea Working Papers, www.blacksea.gr), vol. 8, forthcoming. The Black Sea Historical Statistics were created by a research group that consisted of Socrates Petmezas (University of Crete and Institute for Mediterranean Studies of the Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas [IMS-FORTH]), Alexandra Papadopoulou (IMS-FORTH) and George Kostelenos (Centre of Planning and Economic Research [KEPE]). See https://project.blacksea.gr/ (last accessed 25 August 2019). The archival material was provided by Martin Ivanov and Andreas Lyberatos for Bulgaria, Constantin Ardeleanu and Dimitrios Kontogeorgis for Romania; Anna Sydorenko and Gelina Harlaftis collected Russian statistics during three scientific missions in Moscow with the initial invaluable help of Viktor Zakharov; statistics for the Ottoman Empire were derived from the important work of Sevket Pamuk and the efforts of Ekin Mahmuzlu; the above statistical evidence was compiled from the British and French consular reports. The research assistants for the initial processing of the primary material were Dr Marianna Abdulaeva, Marios Emmanuel and Leonidas Goudelis. 2 The final datasets will be gradually uploaded to the Black Sea project’s official website, https://project.blacksea.gr/. Shipping historical statistics are still in progress, and they will be available shortly. 3 This research programme was included in the Action ‘Thales’, financed by the Greek National Strategic Reference Framework, the European Union and the Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. The project was led by Gelina Harlaftis, and hosted at the Department of History of the Ionian University in collaboration with the University of Crete, the Institute

© Alexandra Papadopoulou and Socrates Petmezas, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_007

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

125

The Black Sea project brought together research groups and academics from all the countries surrounding the Black Sea and beyond, and combined their specialised expertise and linguistic skills to study the history and culture of this geographic, economic and social entity. As Harlaftis indicates in Chapter 2 of this volume, the fundamental unit of research of the project is the sea itself, which is methodologically perceived through its port cities. The analysis focuses on the economic activities and the socio-cultural environment of the port cities, their coastal area and hinterland; it examines the integration of regional markets and their interlinkages with the global economy, without being restrained by political boundaries and cultural cleavages. The project follows and combines several research approaches, analysing the Black Sea economy using the port cities as its building blocks. This was crucial to overcome the danger of providing aggregate national/imperial statistics that would conceal the local and regional dimensions. With this in mind, the available statistical data from twenty-one port cities are collected and used;4 these port cities acted as hubs of the region’s international trade and shipping activities during the ‘long’ nineteenth century, from the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca (1776) to the First World War. The goal of the Black Sea project was to provide the academic community with a ‘holistic’ analysis of the Black Sea, through the combination of different but complementary interdisciplinary approaches. From a methodological point of view, all of its components – port cities – were studied both individually and as interacting nodes of the larger geo-economic entity within and between the port cities’ groups. Therefore, the research was structured in two levels: firstly on the port city level, focusing on each port city’s trade and shipping traffic, supplemented by qualitative information related to its demographic, economic and social (i.e. of its ethnic-confessional communities) profile, and secondly on the national/imperial level. The rest of this chapter presents the methodology adopted, the sources examined and the problems encountered with this project. It is divided into of Mediterranean Studies of the Foundation of Research and Technology Hellas, the National Hellenic Research Foundation, the University of Thessaly, the University of the Aegean and twenty-three academic institutions  – universities, research institutes and archives  – from other countries like Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Russia, Georgia, Moldova, Norway, Italy, Israel and the United States. For more information on the Black Sea project, see https:// project.blacksea.gr/ (last accessed 25 August 2019). 4 The project initially included twenty-four port cities, including Kherson, Nezhin – as a main ‘land transport hub’ – and Giresun (or Kerassund). These three ports registered insignificant international trade flows during the ‘long’ nineteenth century, and consequently were not included in the BSHS.

126

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

three parts. The first part focuses on the BSHS as a part of the wider Black Sea project. The second part presents the sources used and the methodology adopted for the formation of the BSHS. Finally, in the third part, an overview is given of the main results and interpretations of the BSHS. 1

The Black Sea Historical Statistics and the Black Sea Project

The BSHS shares the novel methodological approach of the Black Sea project, which adopts the Black Sea as a unit of analysis, based on the argument that it constitutes a discrete subject of holistic historical research. This viewpoint draws from the revival of the history of the sea, which considers the sea as a geographical unit shaped and reshaped by the economic, political and cultural interaction with the communities ashore.5 Within this context, the sea is not perceived as an undifferentiated liquid mass that fills the empty space between the continents and their shores, but rather as an extension of the social ‘fabric’ that is woven both ashore and onboard. The Black Sea should thus be studied as a distinct unit, defined by its specific characteristics, its land and seascape and morphology, its embedded economic and social features and patterns during the protracted rise of the global economy. It was this intensifying economic interconnectedness that unleashed – or sometimes hindered – the local, regional and international dynamics that transformed the hinterland of the Black Sea into the main granary of the modern world in the nineteenth century. From this angle, the Black Sea economy can be viewed as a geoeconomic unit that evolved by gradually encompassing all the lands which were dependent and affected by what was happening in the globalising world, beyond national/imperial borders. Defining the Black Sea as an expanding geo-economic and social unit formed by the ever-changing intra- and inter-regional links, aims at understanding and exposing how the process of globalization, which occurred simultaneously in different locations over the world, unfolded and affected this specific area. In that sense, exploring the history of the Black Sea region is simultaneously an enterprise of the world, and of regional history. In consequence, it also constitutes a contribution to regional history, analysing the whole of the Black Sea by way of its interrelated component parts (its port cities) in an effort to overcome the limitations set by the long-established nationally minded disciplinary and historical approaches. 5 See Gelina Harlaftis, ‘What is Maritime History?’ Forum, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020).

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

127

In that sense, this project challenges the focus of traditional historiography on national territory as a compact all-inclusive economic entity. Our analysis of the Black Sea economy transcends the borderlines of national/imperial entities, taking into account that commercial exchange and maritime transport cross borders. This approach, which runs across the whole project, offers an insight into how different patterns of synergy and competition developed within the Black Sea area beyond national or imperial borders. One would think this might lead to neglecting the role of political and institutional factors. We believe the contrary happens, as this approach broadens and deepens our historical understanding of the interplay between private initiatives and the adoption by the central and regional authorities of new technologies and policies and the foundation of institutions affecting the formation of local and regional land and sea transport systems. The Black Sea economy is reconstructed horizontally, by exploring the various transport systems developed around the twenty-one port cities that mushroomed along its coasts and interacted more intensively with each other and with their expanding hinterlands. Only a few of these port cities existed before the late eighteenth century, while the majority of them were founded and developed gradually following the ‘opening of the Black Sea’ after 1776. On the western coast of the Black Sea, the major river ports of Braila and Galatz, in the Lower Mouth of the Danube, already existed; however, they only grew in importance in the 1830s, while Constanța rose after the annexation of the province of Dobrogea in 1878, as a result of intended Romanian state policy. On the southwestern Bulgarian shore, the old ports of Burgas and Varna expanded gradually, from the establishment of the Bulgarian principality until the First World War.6 On the Russian northern coast, two groups of port cities were founded by imperial orders: on the northwestern coast, Kherson was founded in 1778, followed by Nikolayev in 1789 and Odessa in 1794.7 On Crimea, of the three major port cities of Evpatoria, Sebastopol and Theodosia, only the last one preexisted, while the other two were founded in 1783.8 On the eastern coast, on the Azov Sea, the main port cities are Mariupol, Berdyansk, Taganrog, 6 Constantin Ardeleanu and Andreas Lyberatos (eds), Port-Cities of the Western Shore of the Black Sea: Economic and Social Development, 18th–Early 20th Centuries, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 1 (Corfu, 2017) (www.blacksea.gr). 7 Evrydiki Sifneos, Oksana Iurkova and Valentyna Shandra (eds), Port-cities of the Northern Shore of the Black Sea: Institutional, Economic and Social Development, 18th–Early 20th Centuries, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 2 (Corfu, forthcoming) (www.blacksea.gr). 8 Anna Sydorenko, ‘The Economic and Social Development of the Crimean City-ports During the Second Half of the 19th Century’ (Unpublished PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2017) [in Greek].

128

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

Rostov-on-Don and Kerch. They were founded at the end of the eighteenth century, but they remained stagnant until the 1860s, except for Taganrog, which rose as the single most important grain-exporting port of the Russian Empire (second only to Odessa), until it was equalled and even surpassed by Rostov-on-Don in the second half of the nineteenth century. Novorossiysk and Batumi on the Russian eastern coast, developed in the late nineteenth century. Batumi rose as a port of export for Caspian oil and Novorossiysk exported grain, profiting from the steep growth of production and trade in the area of Kuban.9 On the Ottoman southern coast, Trabzon and Samsun were the most important port cities and hubs of commercial traffic with Istanbul and the northern coast of the Black Sea.10 The BSHS contains ‘raw’ statistical data on foreign trade (imports and exports) and shipping movements from the entire Black Sea, presented comprehensively with annual data from 1812 to 1914. It is part of a larger group of databases produced by the Black Sea project named as the ‘Black Sea Database’, which also contains detailed statistical and qualitative information on the Black Sea registered ships (Argo database),11 on international merchants and shipowners of the Black Sea (Jason database),12 on detailed arrivals and departures of ships at Black Sea ports (Golden Fleece database),13 church registers of the Greek Orthodox population of Taganrog and Odessa (Argonauts database)14 and immigrants from Odessa to North and South America (Medea database)15 (see Chapter 2 in the present volume). All the above have been used by fellow historians and other specialists of the Black Sea project to document their research in a series of edited volumes, which constitute an important contribution to the historical research.16 The special contribution of the BSHS within the wider Black Sea project was the compilation and processing of data from heterogeneous archival sources of different nations, languages, units and measures into a single and 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Gelina Harlaftis et al. (eds), Between Grain and Oil from the Azov to Caucasus: The Port-cities of the Eastern Coast of the Black Sea, Late 18th – Early 20th Centuries: History of the Black Sea: Eastern Shore, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 3 (Corfu, forthcoming) (www.blacksea.gr). Edhem Eldem, Vangelis Kechriotis and Sophia Laiou (eds), The Economic and Social Development of the Port-cities of the Southern Black Sea Coast, Late 18th–Beginning of the 20th Century, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 5 (Corfu, 2017). Published in www.blacksea.gr (last accessed 11 May 2020). Published in www.blacksea.gr (last accessed 11 May 2020). Under publication in www.blacksea.gr. Under publication in www.blacksea.gr. Under publication in www.blacksea.gr. The volumes of the Black Sea project are available online at https://books.blacksea.gr/ (last accessed 25 August 2019).

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

129

homogenised database system that could be used as a tool for the analysis of commerce and maritime transport in the Black Sea. The BSHS has partly been inspired by the tradition of maritime history in collecting, handling and processing large-scale and geographically dispersed archival sources (with the aid of contemporary Information Technology) to better understand the international shipping industry.17 This line of research was spearheaded by ‘The Atlantic Canada Shipping Project’, undertaken by the Maritime History Group, which created the database ‘Ships and Seafarers of Atlantic Canada’, a research model adopted by several other maritime historians.18 In this context, the BSHS is considered to be a contribution towards the construction of historical statistics serving maritime history, aiming not only to enable cross-national comparison but also to reveal patterns of complementarity and connectivity that shaped shipping and seaborne trade. The BSHS is equally inspired by a similar trend in economic history, namely that of constructing historical national accounts. Historical national accounts were driven initially by the need to estimate the long-term economic performance of certain nations, and later evolved within the context of the rise of the global economy and global economic history. Researchers from all around the world have devoted their efforts to amassing and combining data on national and international levels.19 Angus Maddison’s historical statistics, a single unified dataset on the world economy, is considered a milestone, as it gave the tools to transcend the limits of national statistics and included international comparisons and analyses on the patterns of regional and global connectivity.20 However, the studies of comparative historical national accounts have not 17

18

19 20

Lewis R. Fischer, ‘The International Merchant Marine in Comparative Perspective: An Analysis of Canada and Norway, 1870–1900’ in Schifffahrt und Handel [Shipping and Trade]: Vorträge, gehalten anlässlich der Verabschiedung von Lars U. Scholl in den Ruhestand im März 2012 (Bremen: Edition Falkenberg, 2016), 77–99. On details related to the Atlantic Canada Shipping Project, see https://www.mun.ca/ mha/holdings/acsp.php (last accessed 25 August 2019). On several datasets on the Dutch shipping industry, see https://dutchshipsandsailors.nl/?page_id=2. On transport history datasets, see https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/78282d69-f351-3f53 -a4e4-6755f66a4769. For an overview of the existing resources on historical statistics worldwide, see http:// www.historicalstatistics.org/ (last accessed 25 August 2019). Angus Maddison, The World Economy: Historical Statistics, Development Centre Studies (Paris: OECD, 2003). The research and database completion he began continues after his death, thanks to the Maddison Historical Statistics Project based in the University of Groningen  – see https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/ (last accessed 3 April 2020). An earlier example was set by the works of scholars such as Paul Bairoch and Brian R. Mitchell. Michael G. Mulhall’s The Dictionary of Statistics can be considered the original founding contribution of this field in the late nineteenth century.

130

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

reached full global geographic coverage, as whole areas of Europe, and especially Eastern European countries surrounding the Black Sea, have been hitherto neglected. Historical studies on the global economy of the nineteenth century, in general, have been largely limited to the rise of an integrated economy between the UK and, at best, Western and Northern Europe and the United States, known as the ‘Atlantic economy’, at the end of the nineteenth century.21 Whereas North American markets have triggered numerous studies, the Black Sea region  – with very few scattered exceptions  – has not been incorporated yet in this research agenda. Certainly, the relative inaccessibility of archival sources and historical statistical literature has played an important role. The fragmentation of archival material, combined with the linguistic barriers, made it harder for researchers to gain access to historical material. While there are some existing historical studies that managed to overcome the barriers mentioned above, they mostly focused on the evaluation of the Russian economic performance.22 From the 1960s to the present day, research has mostly been in relation to the established historical accounts on the backwardness of the Russian agrarian economy of the nineteenth century. While scholars’ attention has almost exclusively focused on proving or disproving the efficiency of the Russian economy, the regional dimension of economic progress, and especially the role of the territory that surrounded the Black Sea and was dominated by the highly successful grain exports that made it the granary of Europe, has been largely neglected.23 In recent decades, there has been 21

22

23

Kevin H. O’Rourke, ‘The European Grain Invasion, 1870–1913’, Journal of Economic History 57/4 (1997), 775–801. See also Kevin H. O’Rourke and Jeffrey G. Williamson, Globalization and History: The Evolution of a Nineteenth-century Atlantic Economy (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999). Earlier influential research on the global economic history of the late nineteenth century was attempted by none other than Sir William Arthur Lewis’s Growth and Fluctuations 1870–1913 (London: Routledge Revivals, 1978). Alexander Gerschenkron, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective, A Book of Essays (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1962). Paul Gregory, Russian National Income, 1885–1913 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Arcadius Kahan, The Plow, the Hammer and the Knout: An Economic History of the Eighteenth-Century Russia (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985); Jacob Metzer, ‘Railway Development and Market Integration: The Case of Tsarist Russia’, Journal of Economic History 34/3 (1974), 529–50; Barry Goodwin and Thomas Grennes, ‘Tsarist Russia and the World Wheat Market’, Explorations in Economic History 35 (1998), 405–30. David Jacks, ‘Intra- and International Commodity Market Integration in the Atlantic Economy, 1800–1913’, Explorations in Economic History 42 (2005), 381–413. Andrei Markevich, ‘Economic Development of the late Russian Empire in Regional Perspective’, Working Paper. See also the project ‘Динамика экономического и социального развития России в XIX–начале ХХ вв’, [Dynamics of Economic and

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

131

more intense interaction and exchange of historical research between Western and Eastern Europe. Even so, studies of economic history that place the Black Sea at the centre of their analysis have as yet been almost completely absent. As regards the Ottoman sources, the need for specialised palaeographic expertise on Ottoman Turkish made them largely unreachable. However, historical research since the 1990s has made extraordinary progress in collecting, elaborating and constructing a unified body of data. This is the valuable Historical Statistical Series on the Ottoman Empire, covering sectors such as trade, agriculture, public administration, population, education, industry, institutions, and so on.24 A similarly significant effort to produce datasets has been made by scholars in Bulgaria25 and Romania,26 which have been used in the creation of the BSHS.

24

25

26

Social Development of Russia in the 19th and 20th Centuries], directed by Professor Leonid I. Borodkin (http://www.hist.msu.ru/Dynamics/index.html, last accessed 3 April 2020); and the newly constructed dataset ‘Electronic Repository of Russian Historical Statistics, 18th–21st Centuries’ (2015) by Gijs Kessler and Andrei Markevich, funded by the ‘Dynasty’ foundation (http://ristat.org/ last accessed 7 November 2019). Sevket Pamuk, üzyilda Osmanli dis ticareti [Ottoman Foreign Trade in the 19th Century] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 1995). Tevfik Güran, Osmanli Devleti’nin ilk istatistik yilligi, 1897 [The First Statistical Yearbook of the Ottoman Empire, 1897] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 1997). Cem Behar, Osmanli Imparatorlugu’nun ve Türkiye’nin nüfusu, 1500–1927 [The Population and Ottoman Empire and Turkey, 1500–1927] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 1996). Mehmet Ö. Alkan, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e modernlesme sürecinde egitim istatistikleri, 1839–1924 [Education Statistics in Modernization from the Tanzimat to the Republic, 1839– 1924] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 2000). For an overview of these series, see Halil Inalcik and Sevket Pamuk, Osmanli devletinde bilgi ve istatistik [Data and Statistics in the Ottoman Empire] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 2000). Kiril Popoff, La Bulgarie économique, 1879–1911, Études statistiques (Sofia: Imprimerie de la cour Société par Actions, 1920); Martin Ivanov and Adam J. Tooze, ‘Convergence or Decline on Europe’s Southeastern Periphery? Agriculture, Population, and GDP in Bulgaria, 1892–1945’, Journal of Economic History 67/3 (2007), 672–704 and Martin Ivanov, ‘The Gross Domestic Product of Bulgaria 1870–1945’, Republic of Bulgaria, National Statistical Institute Library, posted online on 23 April 2018 at https://www.nsi.bg/ biblioteka/2018/04/23/the-gross-domestic-product-of-bulgaria-1870-1945/ (last accessed 10 November 2019). See Victor Axenciuc, Evoluţia economică a României, cercetări statistico-istorice, 1859–1947, vols 1–3 (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române, 1992, 1996, 2000).

132 2

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

Sources and Methodology

The formation of BSHS demanded tracking, collecting and homogenising a large amount of ‘raw’ data from the Russian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Ottoman and Western European sources, as well as from secondary literature. In general, the BSHS was based on official collections of national statistics published during the nineteenth century, though not all of them covered the whole period under examination, due to the changes that occurred in the states’ boundaries during those 100 years. Certainly, the Review of Russian Foreign Trade formed the backbone of our databases, as it covers the whole timespan, from 1812 to 1914. Also, its importance lies in the wealth of data registered, going well beyond simple statistical information on foreign trade; it also systematically includes valuable data on navigation and transport, on various population groups and on the social structure. In the course of the nineteenth century, the annual Review changed its title and ministerial appurtenance, but kept the structure of its contents relatively intact (consisting mostly of exhaustive statistical tables). It was constantly growing in volume, incorporating new and more detailed information. It also included long introductory texts and intermittent retrospective aggregated tables.27 Whenever possible and necessary, the datasets were systematically complemented and cross-checked with reference to the partly bilingual Statistical Yearbook, which began its publication in 1904, changed its title in 1910 and published its final volume in 1916.28 The aforementioned rich sources of Russian imperial statistics provided detailed data series on foreign trade and shipping of the port cities of the northern and eastern coasts of the Black Sea, Odessa, Nikolayev, Theodosia, Sevastopol, Evpatoria, Kerch, Mariupol, Berdyansk, Taganrog, Rostov-on-Don, Novorosiysk and Batoum, as well as full national aggregates. 27

28

The Review of Russian Foreign Trade was published as Государственная внешняя торговля в разных ее видах [Foreign Trade of the State in Its Various Regions] by the Department of Foreign Trade of the Ministry of Finances, from 1812 to 1862. Then the volumes were published under a different title, Виды Государственной Внешней Торговли [Review of the Foreign Trade of the State] published by the same department, which was renamed as the Section of Tariffs and Customs from 1863 to 1869. Lastly, the publication was renamed as Обзор внешней торговли России [Review of Russian Foreign Trade] published by the same department, from 1870 to 1917. These series were supplemented by other publications such as Aleksandr Vesselovsky, Tableau du Commerce extérieur de la Russie du 1856 à 1871 (St Petersburg: Commission Impériale Russe de l’Exposition Universelle de Vienne, 1873). See (Статистический) ежегодник Российской Империи (Издания ЦСК) or Annuaire (statistique) de la Russie of the Central Statistical Committee of the Ministry of the Interior.

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

133

Complementing these official statistical publications, important secondary sources have been used for cross-checking the available original data.29 It is important to make reference, in particular, to the unpublished dissertation by Mose Lofley Harvey on the external trade of the Russian Black Sea, which was written in 1938 and has been a valuable source of data and inspiration on methodology for this project.30 Equally important were secondary publications on grain production and exports of the Black Sea region.31 The Ottoman Empire had been able to institute a relatively efficient statistical service in the beginning of the twentieth century, only a quarter of a century before the end of the empire, and had published a very limited amount of data.32 Thus, the bulk of our information on the port cities of Samsun and Trabzon stems from French and English consular archives and from the Ottoman provincial almanacs (salname), which were of questionable precision. The original aggregate data on Ottoman foreign trade have been collected, amended and corrected by Sevket Pamuk, using the relevant foreign trade statistics of the major importing countries.33 Data on the port cities of Burgas and Varna, as well as national aggregates for the post-independence period of Bulgaria, were collected from the annual statistical publication of the Bulgarian Statistical Service containing foreign 29

30 31

32 33

Such as Vladimir M. Obukhov, Движение урожаев зерновых культур в Европейской России в период 1883–1915 г.г. [Movement Crop Yields in European Russia in the Period 1883–1915] (Moscow: n.p., 1927). See also Edward W. Peters, Russian Cereal Crops, Area and Production by Governments and Provinces, Bulletin no. 84 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1911). On Russian production, transport, trade and exports of grain, the best early collection of official data was due to Isaac M. Rubinow, Russia’s Wheat Surplus: Conditions under Which It Is Produced, Bulletin no. 42 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1906); and Russia’s Wheat Trade (Bulletin no. 65) Russian Wheat and Wheat Flour in European Markets (Bulletin no. 66), both published in Washington in 1908. Mose Lofley Harvey, ‘The Development of Russian Commerce on the Black Sea and Its Significance’ (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, 1938). Marion A. O’Connor, ‘World Wheat Supplies, 1865–1913’, Discussion Paper 12 (Princeton: Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University, 1970) (https://rpds.princeton.edu/sites/ rpds/files/media/wp_12.pdf, last accessed 3 April 2020) and published as Annex IV (‘World Supply of Wheat’) to Lewis, Growth and Fluctuations, 285–97. An earlier effort: Frank R. Rutter, Cereal Production of Europe, Bulletin no. 68 of (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1908) and Rutter, European Grain Trade, Bulletin no. 69 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1908). Tevfik Güran (ed.), Osmanli Devleti’nin ilk Istatistik Yilligi 1897. Sevket Pamuk, The Ottoman Empire and European Capitalism, 1820–1913: Trade, Investment and Production (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). See supra footnote 18.

134

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

trade and navigation since 1881.34 The first Statistical Yearbook was published in 1910, but published data on production covered the period since 1901, while data on foreign trade and navigation covered the period from 1881.35 In the case of the Romanian port cities of Braila, Galatz and Constanța, statistics on trade and shipping are available only through the four Statistical Yearbook volumes published by the Statistical Bureau of the Direction of Trade of the Romanian Ministry of Industry and Trade (1902, 1909, 1912, 1915–16).36 The bulk of our data are extracted from the statistics kept by the International Danube Commission concerning trade and navigation in the Lower Danube after its establishment in 1856. Additional data concerning the pre-1856 trade are explicitly related to the exports of grain through the port cities of Braila and Galatz.37 Quite useful to our project have been the reports of the British consuls to the British Foreign Office, which are filled with valuable quantitative and qualitative information on trade and shipping for the Russian ports of the Black Sea from 1821 to 1914. Equally important for additional information are the statistics from the French Consular Reports drawn from R. Follin’s, ‘Ports et

34

35

36

37

The group of collaborators under the direction of Dr Martin Ivanov used the sources which are partly available online from the Digital Library of the National Statistical Institute of the Republic of Bulgaria (http://statlib.nsi.bg:8181/en/index.php last accessed 25 August 2019). Статистически годишник на Българското царство: 1909:година първа [Annuaire statistique du Royaume de Bulgarie. Première année: 1909] (Sofia: Bulgarian Government, published annually since 1910). Статистика за търговията на Българското княжество с чуждите държави през 1882 година [Statistique du commerce de la principauté de Bulgarie avec les pays étrangers pendant l’année 1882] (Sofia: Bulgarian Government, published annually since 1887). Annuaire statistique de la Roumanie (Bucharest: Die, 1902) (edited by the Statistical Department of the Romanian Finance Ministry); Annuaire statistique de la Roumanie (Bucharest: Die, 1909). Annuaire statistique de la Roumanie (Bucharest: Die, 1912). Annuaire statistique de la Roumanie 1915–16 (Bucharest: Die, 1919). The group of collaborators for Romania were Constantin Ardeleanu and Dimitris Kontogeorgis, who also provided the statistical evidence for Romania. See Constantin Ardeleanu, Comerțul exterior și navigația prin gurile Dunării: serii statistice (1901–1914) (Galaţi: Galaţi University Press, 2008); Axenciuc, Evoluţia economică a României. See also Dimitrios Kontogeorgis, ‘Η ελληνική διασπορά στη Ρουμανία: Η περίπτωση της ελληνικής παροικίας της Βραΐλας (αρχές 19ου αι.–1914)’ [Greek Diaspora in Romania: The Case of the Greek paroikia of Braila (Beginning of the 19th Century–1914)] (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Athens, 2012). Additionally, we used the work of Cervodeanu and Marinescu. See Paul Cervodeanu and Beatrice Marinescu, ‘British Trade in the Danubian Ports of Galatz and Braila between 1837 and 1853’, Journal of European Economic History 8/3 (1979), 707–42.

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

135

navigation en Méditerranée: Essai statistique 1870–1905’, which concerned the four ports of Odessa, Taganrog, Nikolayev and Batoum from 1870–1905.38 Handling this mass volume of data and transforming it into a homogenised database demanded certain methodological decisions. Moreover, it involved overcoming the fragmentation, incompatibility and, in some cases, unavailability of data. A crucial factor for the success of this project was the identification and compilation of archival sources that were geographically scattered, often between different states. The necessity of overcoming these linguistic and, to some extent, cultural differences and understandings was met through constant collaboration and coordination between numerous scholars, with competence in ten different languages (Romanian, Bulgarian, Ukrainian, Russian, Ottoman, Georgian, Greek, German, English, French, Italian). At the same time, familiarity with the cultural and historical background of the localities was also essential. The most important methodological issue we had to address in this project was related to the lack of common rules, systematisation and uniformity that characterised the official statistics of the different nations in the nineteenth century. The great variety of contemporary units of weights and measures and national currencies in use is going to be addressed over the following pages. However, there are two other issues which, though complex and unsolvable, should be mentioned briefly beforehand. The first is related to the unknown efficiency of the institutions which originally collected, compiled and published the statistical data we used; the second touches upon the question of the methodological and operational efficacy and probity of its personnel and, in some cases, of the deliberate or unintended distortion of registered figures. This latter issue is connected to the fact that statistics were collected by state authorities for fiscal purposes or to document the success of a specific state policy. Thus, the under- or over-valuation of data may have been in some cases a deliberate act to either boost or reduce the importance of a specific sector according to state or regional interests. Moreover, the lack of official interest in a specific sector of the economy might equally lead to the abandonment or simplification of collected statistical variables and the impoverishment of the concepts used from one year to the next,

38

Raymond Follin, ‘Ports et Navigation en Méditerranée: Essai statistique 1870–1905’, Navigations Méditerranéennes au XIXe siecle, vol. 1 (Marseille et les ports Méditerranéens évaluation quantitative), (Provence: Institut de Recherches Mediterraneennes-Universite de Provence, 1986), 142–4.

136

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

or even to the complete interruption of the collection of statistical variables for some years.39 In the BSHS we had to come to terms with the lack of uniformity and the disconcerting variation in terms of both weights and measures and currency parities.40 In consequence, all data series are expressed in the international standard metric system and have been checked for consistency. All volumes are given in metric tons, equal to 1,000 kilogrammes (kg). We have tried to avoid including volumes of dry weight, but where this was unavoidable, the standard hectolitre (hl), equal to 100 litres, is used. The hectare (ha), equal to 10,000 m2, is the major surface unit, and the kilometre (km), equal to 1,000 metres (m), is the unit of distance. While data from the Eastern European statistical publications were mostly used from the original source in Russian contemporary weights and measures, data stemming from the Ottoman and other Russian corresponding sources have been silently converted. In the Russian case, the system of weights was using a standard weight unit, the pud (пуд), equal to 16.38 kg. All volumes of exports and production after 1885 are usually given in pud. Before this year, volumes were customarily registered in chetvert (четверть), which was the official dry mass unit and was equal to 2.10 hl or 5.77 British imperial bushels and 5.96 US bushels. It is worth adding that the extensively used British imperial quarter (qr) of the long hundredweight (cwt) weighed 28 lb (each lb corresponding to 453.6 g) or 12.7 kg.41 The Russian unit of surface was the desiatina (десятин). The state desiatina measured 1.0925 ha, but there was also a larger landlord desiatina (equal to 1⅓ state desiatina). Distance was measured in verst, equal to 1,066.8 m. In the Ottoman case, the standard measures and weights used were fundamentally different from the metric system. The oka, equal to 1.28 kg, was the major unit of weight, while the kile (composed of four ‘sinik’) was the main measure of dry mass. Surface areas were measured in dönüm (officially equal to 918 m2 or 0.092 ha). The independent Greek, Serbian, Romanian states and the autonomous Bulgarian state adopted the metric system, but being initially parts of the Ottoman realm, they shared with the Ottomans their weights and measures. Surfaces were measured in dekar (декар) in Bulgaria or stremma in Greece, which were officially equal to 1,000 m2 or one tenth of a hectare. 39 40 41

This seems to be the case in some Balkan states like Greece, Bulgaria and Romania, where the published data are temporarily discontinued. Aashish Velkar, ‘Markets, Standards and Transactions: Measurements in Nineteenthcentury British Economy’ (Unpublished thesis, London School of Economics, 2008), 2. The British imperial quarter, a measure of mass, should not be confused with the homonym measure of dry volume, the imperial quarter, which is the equivalent of eight British imperial bushels and is usually adopted in consular reports.

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

137

Dealing with the perplexing diversity of measures also included ship measurement, especially in a field in which tonnage was a crucial factor in calculating freights, port dues, pilotage, towage and quarantine charges, as well as insurance premiums and taxes. The process of adopting a coherent system of tonnage followed the same geographical pattern as in the case of measures and weights, reflecting to a certain extent the expansion of capitalism from the coast towards the inland. In England and France, it was traditional to measure carrying capacity in weight units, or so-called dead-weight tons. Tonnage measurement in the first third of the nineteenth century was based on the so-called Builders Old Measurement (BOM) rule voted by the British Parliament in 1773. The rule of BOM was an attempt to estimate the space of the vessel as the product of length, breadth and depth modified by some coefficients and a divisor intended to deduct a fraction of the result obtained to allow for rounding off.42 This rule was also adopted by the French in 1794 and, after the modifications that occurred in Britain in 1836, a new law, in 1838, made adjustments to the rule. Later on, the introduction of steam rendered the old type of measurement obsolete and a new method was needed. This new rule of ship measurement, known as the ‘Moorsom System’, which set the basis for what we call today gross and net registered tonnage, was adopted by most maritime nations between 1864 and 1885.43 The Russians followed a different unit of measuring shipping volume, the Russian last. The Russian last, which was different from the old European last that measured weight, was calculated by first measuring the ships in English tons and then dividing it by two, according to the following type: length (eng. ft) × width (eng. ft) × depth (eng. ft) = sum / 130 = English registered tons / 2 = Russian Last44 Finally, on 12 February 1878, in the Constantinople Conference, all interested countries adhered to the Moorsom ton,45 which was also adopted by the 42 43

44 45

See Michael Marshall, Ocean Traders (New York: Facts-on-File, 1990); Robert Riegel, Merchant Vessels (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1921), 185–90. Yrgo Kaukianen, ‘Tons and Tonnages: Ship Measurement and Shipping Statistics, c. 1870–1980’ in Lars U. Scholl and Merja-Liisa Hinkkanen (eds), Sail and Steam: Selected Maritime Writings of Yrjo Kaukianen, Research in Maritime History, no. 27 (St. John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2004), 179–206. Anna Sydorenko, The Port-cities of Crimea: Creation, Dynamics and Reorientation. From the Crimean War to the Russian Revolution (Crete: University of Crete Publications, under publication). The Constantinople Conference of 1873 introduced two measurement rules according to the Moorsom System, rule A and rule B. Rule A was the accurate way of measuring the

138

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

Russian Empire in 1879. However, Russia delayed its complete convergence towards the international norms until 1900. Until then, it differed in the calculation of the net registered ton and its relation to the gross registered ton. Russians calculated the net registered ton to be about 32% less than the gross registered ton, while the English net registered ton was about 40% less than the gross registered ton. Thus, the Russian net registered ton was bigger that the English one. The full convergence of the Russian system of calculation of ship tonnage with the British system was finally adopted on 2 March 1900. The lack of standardisation of currency has been evident when dealing with prices and values in the various historical markets of the Black Sea region. The Treaty of the Latin Monetary Union (LMU), signed by France, Switzerland, Belgium and Italy, aimed to create a single currency zone based on bimetallism.46 Shortly afterwards, it was joined by Greece and Bulgaria, while other states implicitly anchored their monetary system to the LMU at par. Eventually this led to the de facto adoption by these countries of the gold standard in 1873, while all the weaker national monetary systems tacitly conformed with the LMU golden franc: Spain, Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, and even Russia and Finland. Despite this currency convergence in the LMU zone, the complexity of convertibility and the fluctuations in value still existed, while at the micro-scale, coins and banknotes in everyday use were not necessarily at par with the official golden monetary unit. In addition, Russia did not introduce the gold standard until 1897. Facing this challenge, we have chosen to express all values in LMU golden francs, since Eastern European countries, whose statistical data were used in this dataset, have pegged their monetary system on the LMU golden franc at par.47 Until November 1881, when Greece effectively appreciated its official

46

47

vessel, but the problem was that the ship had to be empty for a few days to take the measurements. To give ships provisional measurements until they were remeasured under rule A, the Conference provided that if it were loaded, it could be temporarily measured by rule B, a method based on the old BOM system, which yielded approximate results. See Gelina Harlaftis, A History of Greek-Owned Shipping: The Making of an International Tramp Fleet, 1830 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 1996), Chapter 4. The Latin Monetary Union, founded in 1865, was initially a bimetallic monetary system, with the franc containing 4.5 gr of fine silver, the equivalent of 0.290322 gr of gold (i.e. at a ratio of 1:15.5). John F. Chown, A History of Money from AD 800 (London and New York: Routledge, 1994), 85–86, 89. In 1873, after the rapid depreciation of silver in the early 1870s, the LMU integrated the gold standard. Italy, Belgium, Switzerland, Spain and Greece were officially member states. Thomas Marmefelt, History of Money and Monetary Arrangements: Insights from the Baltic and North Seas Region (London and New York: Routledge, 2019), Chapter 7.4.

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

139

golden drachma to be at par with the French franc, the ‘older’ Greek drachma was officially calculated at a parity of 1.12 old drachmas to the golden franc. The Romanian lei had also been effectively pegged to the golden franc since 1867 and officially since 1889. The Bulgarian leva and the Serbian dinar had also been officially pegged to the franc since 1880 and 1878, respectively. Russia used a nonconvertible paper or credit ruble, whose parity fluctuated, until 1897, when the gold standard and banknote convertibility were formally adopted by the Russian Empire. By 1886, a golden ruble had already been coined, pegged to the LMU gold franc at a ratio of four LMU francs per golden ruble. In 1897, the new standard golden ruble was coined at a debased ratio of three new to two old (i.e. 1886) golden rubles, implying a parity of one ruble to 2.68 LMU francs. Thus, the Russian monetary system, which used bullion (gold, silver and even platinum) or copper to coin money, was mainly printing and mostly using state paper notes. The major problem this caused was the need to consequently establish a coherent annual deflator for the paper ruble, which of course was gradually devalued. For BSHS, we have expressed the paper ruble in LMU francs, adopting the deflator index elaborated by Harvey.48 The Ottoman monetary system was, since 1844, officially pegged to the British pound at a rate of 1.1 Ottoman lira (T£) to the pound. There were 100 kürüş to each T£, and there was thus an implicit peg to the golden franc at the rate of 4.4 kürüş to the franc.49 For the period before 1844, we have adopted the deflator index estimated by Şevket Pamuk.50 After 1881, the Ottoman government abandoned the bimetallic system and fully introduced a gold standard.51 Finally, another compounding factor we had to deal with was the emergence of new nation states and the corresponding changes in national territories throughout the nineteenth century. The Black Sea in particular experienced the change of Russian, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman borders and the creation of the autonomous Bulgarian principality in 1878 and the Romanian state, de facto unified since 1866 and officially independent in 1878. On the Russian side, the partition of Poland and the acquisition of territories on the eastern

48 49 50 51

It is very convenient that aggregates and prices in the Greek, Bulgarian and Romanian statistical publications were expressed in the official local golden currency units (which were at par with the golden LMU franc). Harvey, ‘The Development of Russian Commerce’, Annex A1, 341. Şevket Pamuk, A Monetary History of the Ottoman Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 193. Sevket Pamuk, The Ottoman Economy and Its Institutions (London and New York: Routledge, 2009), 25. See Şevket Pamuk and Jeffrey G. Williamson, ‘Ottoman De-Industrialization 1800–1913: Assessing The Shock, Its Impact and the Response’, Working Paper Series (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2009), 1–43. Pamuk and Williamson, ‘Ottoman De-Industrialization’, 217.

140

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

coast of the Black Sea caused a dramatic change in the overland and sea borders. Russia annexed Polish territories in the three partitions of Poland (in 1772, 1793 and 1795), conquered the Ottoman provinces in the Southern Ukraine, the Crimea, Kuban and Caucasus in 1774 and 1791, and the whole of the Caucasian coast up to Batoum gradually up to 1878. Bessarabia was annexed in 1812, while its southern part was lost to the principality of Moldavia from 1856 to 1878 and then it was re-annexed, only to be lost to Romania in 1918. Prior to the establishment of the Romanian state, the creation of the European Commission of the Danube in 1856, after the Crimean War, equally meant that the Russian Empire lost control over the mouth of the Danube. Moreover, there were certain geo-political changes not strictly confined to the Black Sea or to Eastern Europe that have affected the structure of the BSHS. The formation of the German Empire through the unification of the various German states after 1871 calls for special handling of foreign trade and navigation data directed towards this geographical area. Another similar case involves the various Italian kingdoms and city states, which were gradually incorporated into the Italian Kingdom, officially established in 1860 and enlarged by the addition of Veneto in 1866 and the Papal States in 1870, after the end of the Franco-Prussian War. Other minor additions are related to Norway (which passed from the Danish to the Swedish Crown in 1814, before becoming independent in 1905). In the Eastern Mediterranean, Greece was established as an independent state in 1830, comprising the Peloponnese, Euboea, the Cyclades and the mainland south of Thessaly. Additional territories were also included in the Greek state: the Ionian Islands, an autonomous state since 1815 under the protection of Great Britain, were united with Greece in 1864 and with Thessaly and the province of Arta in 1881. 3

Presentation of Data

BSHS is a database system which is comprised of four distinct databases on foreign trade (export and import aggregates, grain and other commodities exports) and shipping traffic (arrivals and departures) from the Black Sea. In general, the data included in these databases contain information on two spatial scales: the ‘port city’ and the ‘national’ (or better, ‘state’) aggregates. There is a general standardised format for the presentation of data for all port cities of the Black Sea and of the ‘national/imperial’ level. However, in some cases, additional national/imperial or port city information is provided drawn from certain archival series. In particular, the Review of Russian Foreign Trade has not just been the richest and most extended source but also the most challenging

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

141

in terms of the detail and complexity of the information provided. Thus, we have made efforts to use all the additional information provided by creating specific complementary datasets without jeopardising the consistency of the main datasets. Special attention is given to the main trading commodities of the Black Sea region: mainly grains, but also oil/oil derivatives and fish/fish products. 3.1 Trade The BSHS contains data on general import and export trade and the export of certain basic commodities, and is organised in two databases, one for each of the ‘national/imperial’ and port city levels. The first database (DB.1) contains main and complementary datasets on aggregate export and import trade and on grain export trade of all states surrounding the Black Sea: the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Danubian principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia – later Romania – and Bulgaria. The first main dataset (ds1.1) is related to the general import and export trade on a ‘national/imperial’ level. All different weights and measures have been homogenised into tons and all values have been expressed in golden LMU francs. The data on the Russian foreign trade are available for the complete time range from 1812 to 1914 and form the most extended and detailed series. Taking advantage of additional data, we have included six complementary datasets. The first complementary dataset (ds1.3) includes data on the four different categories of import and export commodities  – foodstuff, raw material and semi-manufactured goods, manufactured goods and livestock. The second complementary dataset (ds1.4) is related to the exported commodities classified per (European or Asiatic) border of export, as provided by the Russian official statistics. On the other hand, the Romanian statistics on national imports and exports were recorded for the period from 1859 to 1914. A third complementary dataset (ds1.5) concerning the imports and exports between the Romanian state and the United Kingdom has also been included. The dataset on imports and exports of the Bulgarian state is time limited, covering the period from 1886 to 1914. The second main dataset (ds1.2) contains ‘national/imperial’ aggregates of the five major grain exports – wheat, rye, barley, oats and maize – from the Black and Azov Sea regions per state, which are provided both in volume and value. At this level the Russian aggregates are the more extensive and consistent, covering the whole period under examination. Thus, we have included a fourth complementary dataset, (ds1.6), which contains data on the five main types

142

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

of grain divided by the main gateways of export. The main export gateways are recorded by the official statistics of the European part of the Russian Empire, and consisted of the land and sea borders of the Russian Empire. The exports by sea are registered under four categories: the White Sea, the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea and the Azov Sea, the latter two of which were recorded as a single unit up to 1883. The European land borders of the Russian Empire are also included: the Russian – Prussian border, the Russian – Austrian border, the Russian – Romanian border. A separate category is included to record the exports of grain coming from the Asiatic part of the Empire and exported through the Black Sea. Such a dataset can help us understand the constraints determining the competition between different trade routes (by land or sea), both in relation to each other and as they are influenced by the trade policy of the respective states. The fifth complementary dataset (ds1.7) is related to the recipient states of the grain exports per type of grain from the Russian Empire. The recipient countries reported are twenty-four: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Hanseatic cities, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium (included in the Netherlands until 1830), Great Britain, France, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Austria, Greece, Turkey, Romania (the United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia under the Ottoman rule), Ionian Islands, Sardinia, Tuscany, Papal state, Sicily and ‘sundries’. Certain recipient countries change over time according to the establishment of new borders and the formation of new states, as mentioned previously. The general rule adopted here is to show the exports to the state entities as they were at the time they refer to. So the previous discussion of boundary changes should be taken into account when using these data to draw comparisons. Unfortunately, no equivalent data series related to grain exports at a national/imperial level are included for Romania, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire. However, we have added a sixth complementary dataset (ds1.8) that consists of data on the grain exports from the ports of the Lower Danube as recorded by the European Committee of the Danube. The second database (DB.2) contains data referring to aggregate imports/ exports and to the export trade of grains and the other major important commodities of each port city and is divided into two main datasets and two complementary datasets. The first and second main datasets (ds2.1 and ds2.2, respectively) include yearly data on imports and exports and grain exports in both volume and value for each of the twenty-one port cities of the Black and Azov seas from 1812 to 1914. These series are relatively consistent, despite the scarcity of existing data in some cases, and especially in the case of the thirteen Russian port cities. The completeness of the datasets depends mostly on the development of each

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

143

port city over time. Thus, on the western coast, data related to the port cities of Braila and Galatz cover the period 1837–53, and after an interval of almost thirty years without relevant data they emerge again after 1880 and run until the end of the period. In the case of Constanța, data are included for the period 1881 and only for the import/export trade. For the Bulgarian ports of Varna and Burgas, data emerge in the 1880s, while those related to the Ottoman ports of Trabzon and Samsun are probably the least consistent. Two complementary datasets on oil and oil derivatives and fish and fish products from the Russian official statistics are also included in this database. The first complementary dataset (ds2.3) contains yearly data on the exports of raw fish and black and red caviar for eleven port cities of the Russian Empire – Odessa, Taganrog, Evpatoria, Sevastopol, Theodosia, Kerch, Berdyansk, Mariupol, Rostov-on-Don, Novorossiysk, Batum – in volume and value, for the period 1812–1914. The second complementary dataset (ds2.4) is related to the export of oil and its derivatives, in volume and value, for the period 1880–1914 for the Russian port cities of Batum, Novorossiysk and Odessa, while there are some occasional references to the ports of Sevastopol, Rostov-on-Don and Kerch. 3.2 Shipping Shipping statistics include national/imperial aggregates and port city data on all long-distance shipping of both sailing ships and steamships in number and tonnage, converted to metric tons as described previously. Coastal and fishing vessels are not included in this database. Statistics are compiled into two databases (DB. 3 and DB. 4), referring to each port city and to each state for the period 1812–1914. These series are combined for the first time, providing us with a consistent representation of maritime transport and the connections of the Black Sea region to its foreland. These data could also provide a clear view of the growth of transport capacity with the invention of steamship technology through a comparative perspective. DB.3 contains one main dataset (ds3.1), which is related to the national/ imperial aggregates of the arrivals and departures of ships – including steamships and sailing ships – of the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Romania and Bulgaria, in number and tonnage for the whole period under investigation. Statistics on the Russian Empire include data of the ships’ departures by the different seas surrounding the Empire: the White Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Black and Azov Sea (which appear under a single category – the Black Sea), the Caspian Sea and the Atlantic Ocean, which are added as a complementary dataset (ds3.2). Special attention has been given to the change of classification and collected statistical variables from one year to the next.

144

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

The second database (DB.4) contains main and complementary datasets related to ships’ departures and arrivals for each of the twenty-one port cities of the Black Sea. The variables included in the main dataset (ds4.1) are the number of steamships and sailing ships and their tonnage in metric tons. The size of the crew employed in the total of the ships per year, as well as the number and the tonnage of ships under specific flags that are also included in the Russian statistics provide additional information registered in two complementary datasets (ds4.2 and ds4.3, respectively). Shipping statistics for the port cities of Braila and Galatz are mostly extracted from the official registers of the International Committee of the Danube for the period 1856–1914. The same archive provided us with a third complementary dataset (ds4.4), which includes the number and tonnage of ships per flag. Information on ships’ departures from the port cities of Samsun and Trabzon have been compiled through the British and French consular reports and maritime certificates (Sened-i Bahri) from the Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi, which extends until 1860.52 4

Conclusions

Based on the existing statistical series and taking advantage of an immense volume of unexplored information provided by the archival sources, we are currently working to expand the scope and scale of the BSHS, as well as to provide data that would enlighten the researcher on the methodological approach of the Black Sea project. In the future, we plan to expand the BSHS with additional main and complementary datasets of ‘raw’ data. As we move in this direction, we are aiming to collect and compile datasets on the aggregate production of grain, the several types of crops cultivated and the regional production of grain in the various guberniias that formed the hinterland of the Black Sea port cities. Another additional dataset will cover the formation of the transport systems – sea, river and railway lines – that were used to transfer the production from the hinterland to the port cities and from the port cities to the international markets of the nineteenth century. 52

For more information related to the sources of the shipping statistics on the port of Trabzon, see Ekin Mahmuzlu, ‘The Transformation of the Mercantile Shipping in Eastern Anatolian Black Sea Ports between 1834 and 1914’ in Eldem, Kechriotis and Laiou (eds), The Economic and Social Development, 124. See also, Ekin Mahmuzlu, Agrarian and commercial change in The Southeastern Black Sea region: Production, ecology, and institutions (1850s-1910s), (PhD thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2019) (to be published).

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

145

A second way of enriching the BSHS would be to provide additional processed datasets that would focus on specific research questions emerging from the Black Sea project. Certain datasets will be related to trade and shipping within specific maritime regions, comprising several port cities that over time were linked through shipping and trading networks. This type of information, which is the basis of our publications, will be available online to support our research results. Certainly, the potential of this research project is immense, and several other aspects of the Black Sea economy will arise as our work progresses.

Appendix 6.1

DATABASE SYSTEM “BLACK SEA HISTORICAL STATISTICS, 1812–1914” TRADE STATISTICS DATABASE 1: NATIONAL AGGREGATES (IN VOLUME & VALUE) MAIN DATASETS DATASET 1.1: IMPORTS AND EXPORTS DATASET 1.2: GRAIN EXPORTS (WHEAT, RYE, BARLEY, OATS, MAIZE) COMPLEMENTARY DATASETS DATASET 1.3: RUSSIAN EXPORTS-IMPORTS PER CATEGORY OF COMMODITY DATASET 1.4: RUSSIAN EXPORTS PER BORDER (EUROPEAN/ASIAN) DATASET 1.5: IMPORTS-EXPORTS BETWEEN ROMANIA AND UK DATASET 1.6: RUSSIAN GRAIN EXPORTS PER BORDER DATASET 1.7: RUSSIAN GRAIN EXPORTS PER RECIPIENT STATES DATASET 1.8: GRAIN EXPORTS FROM THE PORTS OF THE LOWER DANUBE DATABASE 2: PORT CITIES (IN VOLUME & VALUE) MAIN DATASETS DATASET 2.1: IMPORTS AND EXPORTS DATASET 2.2: GRAIN EXPORTS (WHEAT, RYE, BARLEY, OATS, MAIZE) COMPLEMENTARY DATASETS DATASET 2.3: OIL AND OIL DERIVATIVE EXPORTS FOR RUSSIAN PORT CITIES DATASET 2.4: FISH AND FISH PRODUCT EXPORTS FOR RUSSIAN PORT CITIES

146

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

SHIPPING STATISTICS DATABASE 3: NATIONAL AGGREGATES (IN NUMBER & TONNAGE) MAIN DATASETS DATASET 3.1: STATE AGGREGATES OF ARRIVALS & DEPARTURES COMPLEMENTARY DATASETS DATASET 3.2: RUSSIAN DEPARTURES BY SEA FRONTIERS DATABASE 4: PORT CITIES (IN NUMBER & TONNAGE) MAIN DATASETS DATASET 4.1: DEPARTURES COMPLEMENTARY DATASETS DATASET 4.2: NUMBER OF CREWS EMPLOYED IN SHIPS DEPARTED FROM RUSSIAN PORT CITIES DATASET 4.3: SHIPS DEPARTING FROM RUSSIAN PORT CITIES PER FLAG (IN TYPE, NUMBER & TONNAGE) DATASET 4.4: SHIP TRAFFIC FROM PORT CITIES OF THE LOWER DANUBE

Bibliography Alkan Mehmet Ö., Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e modernlesme sürecinde egitim istatistikleri, 1839–1924 [Education Statistics in Modernization from the Tanzimat to the Republic, 1839–1924] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 2000). Ardeleanu Constantin and Andreas Lyberatos (eds), Port-Cities of the Western Shore of the Black Sea: Economic and Social Development, 18th–Early 20th Centuries, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 1 (Corfu, 2017). Ardeleanu Constantin, Comerțul exterior și navigația prin gurile Dunării: serii statistice (1901–1914) (Galaţi: Galaţi University Press, 2008). Axenciuc Victor, Evoluţia economică a României, cercetări statistico-istorice, 1859–1947, vols 1–3 (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române, 1992, 1996, 2000). Behar Cem, Osmanli Imparatorlugu’nun ve Türkiye’nin nüfusu, 1500–1927 [The Population and Ottoman Empire and Turkey, 1500–1927] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 1996). Cervodeanu Paul and Beatrice Marinescu, ‘British Trade in the Danubian Ports of Galatz and Braila between 1837 and 1853’, Journal of European Economic History 8/3 (1979), 707–42. Chown John F., A History of Money from AD 800 (London and New York: Routledge, 1994).

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

147

Eldem Edhem, Vangelis Kechriotis and Sophia Laiou (eds), The Economic and Social Development of the Port-cities of the Southern Black Sea Coast, Late 18th–Beginning of the 20th Century, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 5 (Corfu, 2017). Fischer Lewis R., ‘The International Merchant Marine in Comparative Perspective: An Analysis of Canada and Norway, 1870–1900’ in Schifffahrt und Handel [Shipping and Trade]: Vorträge, gehalten anlässlich der Verabschiedung von Lars U. Scholl in den Ruhestand im März 2012 (Bremen: Edition Falkenberg, 2016), 77–99. Follin Raymond, ‘Ports et Navigation en Méditerranée : Essai statistique 1870–1905’, Navigations Méditerranéennes au XIXe siecle, vol. 1 (Marseille et les ports Méditerranéens évaluation quantitative), (Provence : Institut de Recherches Mediterraneennes-Universite de Provence, 1986). Gerschenkron Alexander, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective, A Book of Essays (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1962). Goodwin Barry and Thomas Grennes, ‘Tsarist Russia and the World Wheat Market’, Explorations in Economic History 35 (1998), 405–30. Gregory Paul, Russian National Income, 1885–1913 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Güran Tevfik, Osmanli Devleti’nin ilk istatistik yilligi, 1897 [The First Statistical Yearbook of the Ottoman Empire, 1897] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 1997). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘What is Maritime History?’ Forum, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020). Harlaftis Gelina et al. (eds), Between Grain and Oil from the Azov to Caucasus: The Port-cities of the Eastern Coast of the Black Sea, Late 18th–Early 20th Centuries: History of the Black Sea: Eastern Shore, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 3. Harlaftis Gelina, A History of Greek-Owned Shipping: The Making of an International Tramp Fleet, 1830 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 1996). Harvey Mose Lofley, ‘The Development of Russian Commerce on the Black Sea and Its Significance’ (PhD thesis, University of California, 1938). Inalcik Halil and Sevket Pamuk, Osmanli devletinde bilgi ve istatistik [Data and Statistics in the Ottoman Empire] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 2000). Ivanov Martin, ‘The Gross Domestic Product of Bulgaria 1870–1945’, Republic of Bulgaria, National Statistical Institute Library, posted online on 23 April 2018 at https://www .nsi.bg/biblioteka/2018/04/23/the-gross-domestic-product-of-bulgaria-1870-1945/ (last accessed 10 November 2019). Ivanov Martin and Adam J. Tooze, ‘Convergence or Decline on Europe’s Southeastern Periphery? Agriculture, Population, and GDP in Bulgaria, 1892–1945’, Journal of Economic History 67/3 (2007), 672–704. Jacks David, ‘Intra- and International Commodity Market Integration in the Atlantic Economy, 1800–1913’, Explorations in Economic History 42 (2005), 381–413.

148

Papadopoulou and Petmezas

Kahan Arcadius, The Plow, the Hammer and the Knout: An Economic History of the Eighteenth-Century Russia (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985). Kaukianen Yrgo, ‘Tons and Tonnages: Ship Measurement and Shipping Statistics, c. 1870–1980’ in Lars U. Scholl and Merja-Liisa Hinkkanen (eds), Sail and Steam: Selected Maritime Writings of Yrjo Kaukianen, Research in Maritime History, no. 27 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2004), 179–206. Kontogeorgis Dimitrios, ‘Η ελληνική διασπορά στη Ρουμανία: Η περίπτωση της ελληνικής παροικίας της Βραΐλας (αρχές 19ου αι.–1914)’ [Greek Diaspora in Romania: The Case of the Greek paroikia of Braila (Beginning of the 19th Century–1914)] (PhD thesis, University of Athens, 2012). Lewis Sir William Arthur, Growth and Fluctuations 1870–1913 (London: Routledge Revivals, 1978). Maddison Angus, The World Economy: Historical Statistics, Development Centre Studies (Paris: OECD, 2003). Mahmuzlu Ekin, Agrarian and commercial change in The Southeastern Black Sea region: Production, ecology, and institutions (1850s-1910s), (PhD thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2019) (to be published). Marmefelt Thomas, History of Money and Monetary Arrangements: Insights from the Baltic and North Seas Region (London and New York: Routledge, 2019). Marshall Michael, Ocean Traders (New York: Facts-on-File, 1990). Metzer Jacob, ‘Railway Development and Market Integration: The Case of Tsarist Russia’, Journal of Economic History 34/3 (1974), 529–50. Obukhov Vladimir M., Движение урожаев зерновых культур в Европейской России в период 1883–1915 г.г. [Movement Crop Yields in European Russia in the Period 1883– 1915] (Moscow: n.p., 1927). O’Connor Marion A., ‘World Wheat Supplies, 1865–1913’, Discussion Paper 12 (Princeton: Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University, 1970). O’Rourke Kevin H. and Jeffrey G. Williamson, Globalization and History: The Evolution of a Nineteenth-century Atlantic Economy (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999). O’Rourke Kevin H., ‘The European Grain Invasion, 1870–1913’, Journal of Economic History 57/4 (1997), 775–801. Pamuk Şevket, The Ottoman Economy and Its Institutions (London and New York: Routledge, 2009). Pamuk Şevket and Jeffrey G. Williamson, ‘Ottoman De-Industrialization 1800–1913: Assessing the Shock, Its Impact and the Response’, Working Paper Series (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2009), 1–43. Pamuk Şevket, A Monetary History of the Ottoman Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Pamuk Şevket, üzyilda Osmanli dis ticareti [Ottoman Foreign Trade in the 19th Century] (Ankara: TC Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitüsü, 1995).

The Black Sea in the Global Economy of the Nineteenth Century

149

Pamuk Şevket, The Ottoman Empire and European Capitalism, 1820–1913: Trade, Investment and Production (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). Peters Edward W., Russian Cereal Crops, Area and Production by Governments and Provinces, Bulletin no. 84 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1911). Petmezas Socrates and Alexandra Papadopoulou, The Development of the Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach (Black Sea Working Papers, www.blacksea.gr), vol. 8, forthcoming. Popoff Kiril, La Bulgarie économique, 1879–1911, Études statistiques (Sofia: Imprimerie de la cour Société par Actions, 1920). Riegel Robert, Merchant Vessels (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1921). Rubinow Isaac M., Russia’s Wheat Trade, Bulletin no. 65, (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1908). Rubinow Isaac M., Russian Wheat and Wheat Flour in European Markets, Bulletin no. 66, (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1908). Rubinow Isaac M., Russia’s Wheat Surplus: Conditions under Which It Is Produced, Bulletin no. 42 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1906). Rutter Frank R., Cereal Production of Europe, Bulletin no. 68 of (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1908). Rutter Frank R., European Grain Trade, Bulletin no. 69 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Statistics of the US Department of Agriculture, 1908). Sifneos Evrydiki, Oksana Iurkova and Valentyna Shandra (eds), Port-cities of the Northern Shore of the Black Sea: Institutional, Economic and Social Development, 18th–Early 20th Centuries, Black Sea Working Papers, vol. 2. Sydorenko Anna, ‘The Economic and Social Development of the Crimean City-ports During the Second Half of the 19th Century’ (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2017). Velkar Aashish, ‘Markets, Standards and Transactions: Measurements in Nineteenthcentury British Economy’ (PhD thesis, London School of Economics, 2008). Vesselovsky Aleksandr, Tableau du Commerce extérieur de la Russie du 1856 à 1871 (St Petersburg: Commission Impériale Russe de l’Exposition Universelle de Vienne, 1873).

Chapter 7

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea: Port Policy, Traffic, Infrastructure in the Port of Theodosia, 1895–1913 Anna Sydorenko Greek maritime history is inextricably linked to the Black Sea region. The importance of Greek trade diaspora and Greek shipping during the creation and development of the Black Sea port cities is undeniable. The political balance in the Black Sea changed during the last quarter of the eighteenth century. The centuries-long Ottoman domination of the Black Sea was overthrown in the Russian-Turkish wars (1768–74 and 1787–92). After another fifty years, the Treaty of Adrianople in 1829 opened the Black Sea to international trade and shipping. The participation of the Greeks in the Russian-Turkish wars on the Russian side, the Greek War of Independence (1821–9) and the expansion of Russia to the northern and eastern shores of the Black Sea instigated continuous waves of migration and establishment of Greek settlers in the port cities of the Black Sea. Greek populations from the Aegean and Ionian Islands, as well as from other parts of the Ottoman Empire, created affluent merchant communities in the newly developed port cities. Their activities transformed the latter into main grain export gateways and integrated them into the industrialised European markets of the second half of the nineteenth century. Tracking their close relationship during the age of capital and empires has been a great challenge for researchers for many decades, as access to the numerous archives scattered throughout the vast Soviet territory was almost impossible for foreign researchers, but also limited for local historians. The first major studies in Greek historiography appeared in the late 1990s with the work of Vassilis Kardasis, one of the first to examine the Greek commercial communities as the driving force for the development of the region in the newly created and fast-growing South Russia.1 The integration of Black Sea trade with Western 1 Vasilis Kardasis, Έλληνες ομογενείς στη Νότια Ρωσία, 1775–1861 [The Greeks in Southern Russia 1775–1861] (Athens: Alexandria, 1998). There have been a limited number of books that have dealt mainly with the Greek presence in the Black Sea through cultural, social and political angles, including Marianna Koromila, The Greeks in the Black Sea: From the Bronze Age to the Early Twentieth Century (Athens: Panorama, 1991); Konstantinos Papoulides, Γρηγόριος Γ. Μαρασλής (1831–1907): Η ζωή και το έργο του [Grigorios G. Maraslis (1831–1907): His Life and Work]

© Anna Sydorenko, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_008

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

151

European trade is owed to Gelina Harlaftis through an archetypical study of the development of the Greek commercial networks and Greek-owned shipping.2 Spyridon Fokas has dealt with the development of Greek river shipping and merchants in the Lower Danube, extending the Greek historiographical study to the western coast of the Black Sea.3 Almost four decades later, Dimitrios Kontogeorgis presents a comprehensive analysis of the importance of the Greek community in the development of Braila as a commercial centre during the nineteenth century, based on the wealth of Greek and Romanian archives and sources.4 The business activities of the Greek merchant diaspora in southern Russia, from Taganrog to Odessa, are thoroughly examined by Evrydiki Sifneos, who combined the Western European and Russian archives, making an important contribution not only to the history of Greek entrepreneurship but also to its social dimension.5 Anglophone historiography presents an incomplete and limited picture, but includes some important works, such as those of Patricia Herlihy, who analyses for the first time the importance of Greeks and all other ethnicities in the most

2 3 4

5

(Thessaloniki: Idryma Meleton Chersonesou tou Aimou, 1989). On the Greek Revolution, see Theophilus C. Prousis, Russian Society and the Greek Revolution (Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press, 1994), and for a more Greek nationalistic turn see Dimitrios Fotiadis, Η Επανάσταση του 1821 [The Greek Revolution of 1821] (Athens: Votsis, 1977). Gelina Harlaftis, Ιστορία της Ελληνόκτητης Ναυτιλίας, 19ος–20ος αιώνας [A History of Greek-owned Shipping in the 19th and 20th Centuries] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001). Spyridon Fokas, Οι Έλληνες εις την ποταμοπλοίαν του Κάτω Δουνάβεως [The Greeks on the Rivertraffic of the Lower Danube] (Thessaloniki: Idrima Meleton Xersonisou tou Aimou, 1975). Dimitrios Kontogeorgis, ‘Η ελληνική διασπορά στη Ρουμανία: η περίπτωση της ελληνικής παροικίας της Βραΐλας (περ. 1820–1914)’ [Greek Diaspora in Romania: The Case Study of the Greek paroikia of Braila (c. 1820–1914)] (PhD thesis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 2012). Evrydiki Sifneos, Έλληνες έμποροι στην Αζοφική, Η δύναμη και τα όρια της οικογενειακής επιχείρησης [Greek Merchants in the Sea of Azov: The Power and the Limits of Family Business] (Athens: Institute for Neohellenic Research/National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2009); Sifneos, ‘Indifference and/or Egocentrism: The Greek paroikia of Odessa in the Face of Twentieth-century Social Turmoil’ in Andreas Lyberatos (ed.), Social Transformation and Mass Mobilization in the Balkan and Eastern Mediterranean Cities (1900–1923) (Herakleion: Crete University Press, 2012), 289–300; Sifneos, ‘Diaspora Entrepreneurship Revisited: Greek Merchants and Firms in the Southern Russian Ports’, Entrepreneurship et Histoire 63 (June 2011): 40–52; Sifneos, ‘Rentiers, Teachers and Workers: Greek Women in Late Nineteenth-century Odessa’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 34/2 (2010): 182–200; Sifneos, ‘Can Commercial Techniques Substitute Port Institutions? Evidence from the Greek Presence in the Black and Azov Sea Ports (1780–1850)’ in Raffaella Salvemini (ed.), Istituzioni e traffic tra età antica e crescita moderna (Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Instituto di Studi sulle Societá del Mediterraneo, 2009), 77–90; Sifneos, ‘Οι αλλαγές στο ρωσικό σιτεμπόριο και η προσαρμοστικότητα των ελληνικών εμπορικών οίκων’ [The Changes in Russian Grain Trade and the Adaptability of the Greek Trading Houses], Ta Istorika 40 (June 2004): 53–96.

152

Sydorenko

important commercial and shipping centre of southern Russia, Odessa. She was the only one at her time to access the Soviet archives and produce valuable studies.6 Long-standing and systematic research in the Ukrainian archives was recently indicated in Evrydiki Sifneos’s study on Odessa, which is considered more as a metropolitan East Mediterranean port city than as a periphery of the Russian Empire.7  The Russian and Ukrainian bibliography presents an introverted picture, which is centred almost exclusively around traditional descriptive studies that do not communicate with foreign historiography or new approaches. They nevertheless present a considerable wealth of information for the participation of the Greeks in trade and shipping on the northern shore of the Black Sea. A remarkable effort to analyse the shipping activities of the Greek diaspora of South Russia is presented in the work of Oleksiy Shliakhov,8 while Lilia Beloousova and Vladimir Morozan have dealt with the commercial and financial practices of Greek merchants in the region, studies based on a significant volume of sources from the historical archives of Odessa and St Petersburg.9 At the same time, Victor Zakharov10 brings out the first period of the involvement of Greek merchants in the export trade of the ports of the Black and Azov seas during the last quarter of the eighteenth century, while Svitlana Novikova presents an overview of the contribution of the Greeks to the economic development of the northern coast of the Azov Sea, with particular emphasis on the linkages with the ports of the Western and Eastern Mediterranean through maritime trade.11 Despite the considerable and significant efforts to study the 6 7 8 9

10 11

Patricia Herlihy, Odessa: A History, 1794–1914 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1986). Herlihy has also written a significant number of articles on the subject. Evrydiki Sifneos, Imperial Odessa: Peoples, Spaces, Identities (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2018). Oleksiy Shliakhov, Судновласники i моряки Азово-Чорноморського басейну наприкінці XIX–на початку XX ст. [Shipowners and Seafarers in the Black and Azov Seas (Late 19th– Early 20th Centuries)] (Dnipropetrovsk: University of Dnipropetrovsk, 2003). Lilia Beloousova, Το γένος των Πετροκόκκινων, περίοδος της Οδησσού 19ος–αρχές 20ου αιώνα [The Family of Petrokokkinos, Odessa Period, 19th–Early 20th Century] (Chios: Alpha Pi, 2007); Vladimir Morozan, Деловая жизнь на юге России в ХIX–начале XX века [The Business Life in the Russian South, 19th–Beginning of the 20th Century] (St Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin, 2014). Victor Zakharov, Западноевропейские купцы в российской торговле XVIII века [Western European Merchants in 18th Century Russian Trade] (Moscow: Nauka, 2005). Svitlana Novikova, ‘Внесок греків в економічний розвиток Північного Приазов’я (друга половина ХІХ–початок ХХ ст.)’ [Contribution of the Greeks to the Economic Development of the Northern Azov Sea (Second Half of the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries)] (PhD thesis, National Academy of Ukraine/Institute of History of Ukraine, 2012).

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

153

Greek diaspora of the Black Sea, many issues have remained unexplored or limited in certain geographical areas and particular research fields. A number of historiographical gaps have been successfully covered by two international research projects conducted under the auspices of Greek researchers and universities. The result of the first research programme, entitled ‘Economic and Social Development of the Azov Port Cities and Greeks in the Long 19th Century’, was a collective volume that illustrated the contribution of the Greek communities to the economic and social growth of the port cities of the Azov Sea.12 This pioneering study was based on a long-standing, complicated but rewarding research and collaboration of Russian, Ukrainian and Greek historians and researchers during 2007–10.13 A much wider research bringing Greek maritime historiography to the forefront was conducted during the interdisciplinary and inter-university project ‘The Black Sea and Its Port-cities, 1774–1914: Development, Convergence and Linkages with the Global Economy’. This innovative research programme examined the economic and social development of twenty-four Black Sea port cities which formed an integrated market that became the largest grain-exporting area in the world from the second half of the nineteenth century until the beginning of the twentieth century. The programme unified researchers from all the countries that surround the Black Sea for the first time, introducing to many of them the field of Maritime History. At the same time, Western European archives were co-examined with the national archives of these countries, overpassing the language barriers of the Black Sea countries (with a team of experts with many language skills). At the same time, the research aimed to renew the methodological tools, as well as expanding the discipline of Greek Maritime History. One aspect of this was the introduction of port history, which was absent from Greek historiography as a separate research field.14 12

13

14

Evrydiki Sifneos and Gelina Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής 18ος–αρχές 20ού αιώνα. Νέες προσεγγίσεις στην ιστορία των Ελλήνων της νότιας Ρωσίας [Greeks in the Azov, 18th–Beginning of 20th Century. New Approaches in the History of the Greeks in South Russia] (Athens: Institute for Historical Research/National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2015). The research project ‘Economic and Social Development of the Azov Port: Cities and Greeks in the Long 19th Century’ co-organised by the Institute of Neohellenic Research/ National Hellenic Research Foundation and the Ionian University that took place during 2007–10 was led by the researcher Evrydiki Sifneos and Professor Gelina Harlaftis. The project was funded by the J.F. Costopoulos Foundation, the A.G. Leventis Foundation and Alpha Bank. The project ‘The Black Sea and Its Port-cities, 1774–1914. Development, Convergence and Linkages with the Global Economy’ lasted from 2012 to 2015 and was included in the Action ‘Thales’, financed by the Greek National Strategic Reference Framework, the

154

Sydorenko

The central theme of this chapter deals with the creation and development of the port city of Theodosia as a main grain exporter of the Crimean Peninsula during the process of integration of the Black Sea markets with the globalising economy. By setting a port at the centre of the analysis, we examine the impact of external and domestic economic, political and geo-political factors on the creation and growth of the ports in the region of the Black Sea, where more than twenty grain-exporting ports operated. Grain trade from southern Russia was serviced by twelve ports, which were gradually created in the region starting from the last quarter of the eighteenth century until the 1860s. These ports, which stretched to the Black Sea’s northern and eastern coasts, formed a national port system.15 The ports’ role within the national port system was ever-changing due to the addition of new ones, since the empire was expanding, but also due to the introduction of steam and the construction of railways, a fact that further expanded the productive hinterland they serviced. During the second half of the nineteenth century, the Crimean port system, which was part of the national one, consisted of three ports: Theodosia, Evpatoria and Sevastopol. Sevastopol appeared on the map due to a government decree for twenty years, between 1875 and 1895, following the setup of its exporting hinterland through the construction of a railway that connected the city to the productive zone and made possible cargo transports to the port. During that timespan, Sevastopol’s port had the first place in Crimea’s export system (see Figure 7.1), whereas from 1896 to the end of the period, Theodosia’s port ranked first, taking the leading role in the development of the peninsula. In this context, we have attempted in the present chapter to survey the different interrelated factors that contributed in port development. Working as a dynamic unit, port cities connect the hinterland with the foreland through the combined transport system, responding to the supply and demand of the markets. In effect, markets during the nineteenth century had been affected

15

EU and the Greek Ministry of Education. The project was led by the Department of History of the Ionian University (project coordinator: Gelina Harlaftis) in collaboration with the University of Crete, the National Hellenic Research Foundation, the Institute of Mediterranean Studies, the University of Thessaly and the University of the Aegean. It also collaborated with twenty-three academic institutions – universities, research institutes and archives – from the Black Sea countries, i.e. Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Russia and Georgia, as well as Moldavia, Norway, Italy, Israel and the United States. For the formation and development of the national port system of South Russia, see: Anna Sydorenko, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη των πόλεων-λιμανιών της Κριμαίας, β΄ μισό του 19ου– αρχές 20ου αιώνα. Ευπατορία, Σεβαστούπολη, Θεοδοσία’ [The Economic Development of the Crimean Port-cities, Second Half of the 19th, Beginning of the 20th Century. Evpatoria, Sevastopol, Theodosia] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2017), 72–78.

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

155

Figure 7.1 Exports of Evpatoria, Sevastopol and Theodosia, 1856–1913 (in French gold francs) Source: Socratis Petmezas, George Kostelenos and Alexandra Papadopoulou (eds), with the collaboration of Marios Emmanouil, The Development of 24 Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 8 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming), www.blacksea.gr

by local, national and international economic and political circumstances. In the case of the port of Theodosia, the roles of the hinterland and the internal transport system were the two starting factors that critically affected the port’s setup and growth among the Black Sea’s Russian ports. The construction of a railway network in the south was necessary for the growth and unification of the domestic market and the commercialisation of agricultural production. The chapter is divided into three parts. The first part focuses on the imperial port policy that was applied by Russian authorities across South Russia, including the Crimean Peninsula. I will try to trace the different stages of port planning from the end of the eighteenth century until the Crimean War. The second part probes the impact of internal variables on the formation of the port of Theodosia, such as port specialisation, port infrastructure, the railway system and availability of cargoes. The last part focuses on external trade and shipping. It examines the connections of the port with the hinterland (the producers of the land behind the port) and the foreland (the consumers in the ports beyond the Black Sea) through the entrepreneurs that operated in the

156

Sydorenko

port city, indicating how the external factors affected the economic growth of the port. 1

Port Policy

After the annexation of the Crimea in 1783, the expansionist policy of the Russian Empire to the northern coast of the Black Sea was fulfilled. The exodus of Russia to the Black Sea, a desire rooted back in the epoch of Peter the Great, served not only the geo-political aspirations of Catherine the Great but also the modernisation and economic development of the country. An exit to the Mediterranean through navigable, warm and ice-free waters was an important pursuit that led to the creation of the economic region of South Russia. By the last third of the nineteenth century, this region became the biggest grain-exporting area of the world, an integral part of the international market. By the end of the nineteenth century on the northern and western coasts of the Russian Empire twelve port cities had been founded: Kherson (1778), Odessa (1794), Nikolayev (1789/1862), Evpatoria (1798), Sevastopol (1875), Theodosia (1784), Kerch (1774/1821), Berdyansk (1827/1835), Mariupol (1779/1889), Taganrog (1770), Rostov-on-Don (1779/1836) and Novorossiysk (1865), along with a large number of other small towns and landing sites (see Map 7.1).16 The creation and configuration of these ports began at the end of the eighteenth century and was completed almost a century later, as new territories were gradually added to the Russian Empire. Some of the ports were created as a result of a centrally designed policy – that is, as state investment projects. Such projects were applied for the construction of the port city of Kherson and later of Odessa. Others were created independently as natural exit points for a growing hinterland and foreland, and some others were created for military reasons, as naval bases. From the time of their foundation until the Russian Revolution, the port cities did not remain static and unchanged, but each acquired its own dynamics that eventually impeded or strengthened the central imperial leadership.17 16 17

Parentheses state the founding year of the city and the official year on which the port opened to external trade. More specifically, for the creation, development and importance of the port cities of the north and east Black Sea coast, see Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Maritime Transport Systems in Southeastern Mediterranean’ in Edhem Eldem and Socrates Petmezas (eds), The Economic Development of Southeastern Europe in the 19th Century (Athens: Historical Archives Alpha Bank, 2011), 415–25; Sydorenko, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη’; Herlihy, Odessa: A History; V.A. Zolotov, Хлебный экспорт России через порты Черного и Азовского морей в 60–90-е годы XIX века [Russia’s Exports Through the Ports of the Black Sea and the Sea of

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

157

For the Empress, the interrelation of the creation of sea ports, the geostrategic policy and the economic development was clear and constituted a priority in the new waterfront. The Tsarina applied a groundbreaking port policy, especially if we compare it to the lack of port policy in Britain and other powers, as Gordon Jackson has already stressed.18 What is more, the port policy of Catherine the Great was combined with a policy of colonisation of the sparsely populated south, encouraging immigrants through a series of financial concessions. On the one hand, the newly acquired region, which was named New Russia, was colonised through internal migration, namely inhabitants from the old Russian areas of different social strata. On the other hand, more significant and successful was the settlement of farmers, artisans of all trades and foreign merchants from nations that were friendly to the Russian Empire. Foreign entrepreneurs like Greeks, Italians, Jews, Germans, and so on which settled in all the South Russian port cities became a driving force of their economic development. The Greeks introduced the entrepreneurial and maritime ‘know-how’, linking the region with the markets of the Mediterranean and Western Europe. Flourishing Greek communities were created in Odessa, Berdyansk, Mariupol, Taganrog and Rostov-on-Don and contributed to the economic integration of South Russia with the global economy.19 Furthermore, the fostering of non-Russian economic elites from the Mediterranean was intended to fill the gap of the Russian merchant fleet; for example, in 1780 the share of Russian ships in the trade of the main Russian port of St Petersburg was only 3.3%.20 The lack of a shipbuilding infrastructure in the Russian Empire, especially in the south, in combination with the weak connections of the Russian entrepreneurial groups with the maritime world was a

18 19

20

Azov, 1860–1890] (Rostov: University of Rostov, 1996); Sifneos and Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής; Sifneos, Imperial Odessa; Sifneos, ‘Diaspora Entrepreneurship’, 40–52; Evrydiki Sifneos, ‘Merchant Enterprise and Strategies in the Sea of Azov Ports’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/1 (June 2010), 259–68; Kardasis, Έλληνες ομογενείς. Gordon Jackson, The History and Archaeology of Ports (Tadworth: Littlehampton Book Services Ltd, 1983). Elena Druzhinina, Северное Причерноморье в 1775–1800 гг. [The Northern Coast of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov in 1775–1800] (Moscow: Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR), Roger P. Bartlett, Human Capital: The Settlement of Foreigners in Russia 1762–1804 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 31–49, 124–43; Leonard Friesen, Rural Revolutions in Sothern Ukraine (Harvard: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 2008), 23–63. Ialia Pospelova, ‘Становление внешней торговли России через Азовские и Черноморские порты в последней четверти XVIII-начале XIX века’ [The Creation of Russia’s Exporting Trade Through the Ports of the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea during the Last Quarter of the 18th–Beginning of the 19th Century] (PhD thesis, Moscow Region State University, 2012), 85–86.

158

Sydorenko

fundamental obstacle to the economic development of the port cities and of the whole region in general.21 The port policy of Catherine II was aligned with a progressive economic and geo-strategic plan for the area, which gradually bore fruit and in the end proved to be successful. Nevertheless, Catherine’s policy in the south was abandoned in the decades up to the nineteenth century. Most ports of the Black Sea’s northern and eastern coasts were developed without a specific plan, as a result of external economic dynamics and internal responses.22 The period from the end of the eighteenth century to the First World War was crucial for the development of South Russian port cities. It was the period when the growth of the industrial production of Western Europe and rapid development of international trade coincided with the integration of large and rich agricultural regions in the south (called chernoziom) into the Russian Empire and the simultaneous conquest of lands that provided the Russians’ exit to the Black Sea. The cultivation of newly acquired areas with cereals, in combination with the existence of the traditional grain-producing areas of Russia transformed the Russian Empire into a prime grain exporter worldwide. The new port cities established along the Northern Black Sea and Azov Sea coast became the main international grain markets.23 In Crimea, the imperial central planning policy tried to construct port cities with a double importance: port cities that had both strategic and commercial significance in order to safeguard the defence of the area and promote the development of the peninsula. In this way, Evpatoria on the west and Theodosia on the east received the status of porto-franco in 1798 and 1784, respectively, while defensive forts were also constructed. A Russian naval base was established in Sevastopol, which had functioned as porto-franco since 1784.24 The Crimean port cities remained underdeveloped until the Crimean War, despite the fact that they had all received the status of ‘free port’. They did not succeed in developing as main export centres of southern Russia or of the Crimean Peninsula. The porto-franco status was not in itself adequate to promote the Crimean ports; in practice it was not the panacea that the Russian authorities had thought. The successful function of any port relies on two 21 22 23

24

Ialia Pospelova, ‘Становление внешней торговли России’. Sydorenko, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη’, 72–88, 118–25. For the traditional grain productive regions of the Russia, see: Taisia M. Kitanina, Хлебная торговля России в конце ХIХ–начале ХХ веков: стратегия выживания, модернизационные процессы, правительственная политика [Russia’s Grain Trade between the End of the 19th and the Beginning of the 20th Century: Strategy of Survival, Modernisation Processes, Government Policy] (St Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin, 2011), 23–34. Sydorenko, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη’, 32–42, 72–88, 126–43.

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

159

prerequisites: the inland and maritime transport systems which converge and interact in a given geographical space. In the case of the Crimean ports, the land-based transport system was missing, as we will explain below. During the time that Russia was establishing a series of porto-francos, the Russian Empire was at the stage of exploration and geographical discovery of the south. The Russians did not have a clue about the geography, topography, ecology and economy of the newly acquired lands and sites. Their relative lack of information and poor port development efforts were based on the knowledge acquired over the previous centuries. They did not follow the new order of things such as the industrialisation and growing markets of Western Europe, with which the Russian Empire inevitably interacted through the growing export grain trade. The consequences were painful for the Crimean ports. The Crimean War (1854–6) revealed a bundle of interrelated factors for this failure. Firstly, they had a weak relation with the centres of grain production. The Crimean hinterland is very small and only two of the ports of the peninsula have direct access to it: Evpatoria and Theodosia. The lack of road networks, coupled with the obstacles presented by Crimean mountains, hindered the transport of grain to the port of Sevastopol. Secondly, the lack of fluvial networks that could provide cheap and smooth transportation to the other ports, in addition to the insufficient land transport network. The absence of railways to connect the Crimean ports with the productive hinterland of southern Russia played a definitive role in their linkage to the international markets. It was only after the construction of railways in the area in 1875 that the structure of the markets was transformed not only in the Crimea, but also in the whole of Russia. The Crimean War became a landmark and provided the impetus for the development of the area. After that, Russia entered a period of great reforms.25 In this framework, the construction of the railway network was essential for the development of a capitalist market and for the commercialisation of agricultural production. The policy of the central government for the construction and growth of the railway network in southern Russia was not only directly related to military purposes but also to trade. The increase of grain exports in the southern parts of the empire during the first half of the nineteenth century revealed the need for a railway network that would provide faster and cheaper 25

Ben Eklof, John Bushnell and Larissa Zakharova (eds), Russia’s Great Reforms, 1855–1881 (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1994); W.B. Lincoln, The Great Reforms: Autocracy, Bureaucracy and the Politics of Change in Imperial Russia (De Kalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1990); W.E. Mosse, Alexander II and the Modernization of Russia (London: IB Tauris & Co Ltd, 1993); N.G.O. Pereira, Tsar-Liberator: Alexander II of Russia, 1818–1881 (Newtonville: Oriental Research Partners, 1983).

160

Map 7.1

Sydorenko

Port cities, administrative division and railway network of South Russia, early twentieth century © Mitia Frumin

grain transport from the areas of production to the export gateways.26 During that period the grain production areas extended from the Podolia region to the Charkov region (see Map 7.1) and further to the east following the main river and road transport routes of the south that ended at the main exporting ports of Odessa and Taganrog. From the mid-1860s to the end of the 1890s, the main body of the railway network was constructed; it connected the most important ports of the Black Sea, the Sea of Azov and the Baltic Sea, and also the western borders to the agricultural productive lands of the Russian Empire (see Map 7.1). In the Crimean Peninsula two port cities, Sevastopol (in 1875) and 26

For more details about the contribution of the railway network to the completion of Russia’s grain markets, see W.J. Kelly, ‘Railroad Development and Market Integration in Tsarist Russia: Evidence on Oil Products and Grain’, Journal of Economic History 36/4 (December 1976), 908–16; Jacob Metzer, ‘Some Economic Aspects of Railroad Development in Tsarist Russia’, Journal of Economic History 33/1 (March 1973), 314–16; Metzer, ‘Railroad Development and Market Integration: The Case of Tsarist Russia’, Journal of Economic History 34/3 (September 1974), 529–50; Zolotov, Хлебный экспорт, 33–87.

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

161

Theodosia (in 1895), were connected to the railway system and hence to the productive hinterland of the south. 2

Creating a New Port for Grain Exports: Port Infrastructures and the Role of Railway and Productive Hinterland

The technological advances in domestic transport brought about changes to the hinterland of the Crimean ports, giving rise to a new Crimean port system that engaged the Crimean Peninsula in the international grain trade between the Russian Empire with the West. Representative examples are the ports of Sevastopol and Theodosia, as indicated in Figure 7.1. It is worth noting that the important increase of exports in both port cities started in exactly the same year the railway lines opened. The Russians created in Sevastopol a major export port city, which during the period 1875–94 accounted for 74% of the total export value of all three Crimean ports. After 1894 the exports show a tremendous fall of 36.83%, part of a downward trend that ran on until 1901. This was entirely due to geo-strategic Russian state policy that decided, in 1896, to close down Sevastopol for external trade. At the peak of its development it was transformed into the most important naval base of the Black Sea, as Sevastopol was the best natural and ice-free port of the empire. But Russians still needed a commercial port in the Crimean Peninsula. After multiple intense and conflicting plans and calculations, they decided to transform Theodosia into the main export port. Coexistence of a military and commercial port in Sevastopol was not considered prudent for geo-strategic reasons.27 The emergence of any export-oriented port in South Russia depended and was influenced by interrelated economic, geo-physical, political, geo-political and social factors. The economic development of the port city of Theodosia was driven by its geo-physical importance, but also served as a point of connection between land and sea. It served the centres of production (supply) and 27

Gosudarstvennyi Arkhiv Avtonomnoi Respubliki Krym (GAARK) [State Archives of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea], fond 221, opis’ 1. delo 1113, list 2 verso; Derzhavnyi Arkhiv Odes’koi Oblasti (DAOO) [State Archive of the Odessa Region], fond 5, opis’ 1, delo 1414; T. Yeranchov, Доклад севастопольского городского головы по вопросу об изменениях в судьбе севастопольской портовой деятельности [Report of the City’s Prefect of Sevastopol on the Issue of the Changes in the Port’s Activity] (Sevastopol, 1890); T. Yeranchov, Севастополь или Феодосия? [Sevastopol or Theodosia?] (Sevastopol: n.p., 1890); I. Vyshnegradskiy, Соображения по избранию в Крыму места для коммерческого порта [Thoughts on the Selection of a Commercial Port in Crimea] (St Petersburg: n.p., 1890); L.G. Konkevich, Коммерческий порт в Севастополе [Commercial Port in Sevastopol] (Sevastopol: Tipografiia S. Spiro, 1889).

162

Picture 7.1

Sydorenko

General view of the port city of Theodosia, end of the nineteenth century

consumption (demand) through land and maritime transport networks via the merchants and shipowners, its driving force. In the case of Theodosia the hinterland was organised and continuously expanded its cultivated land thanks to the technological advancements in the land transport network.28 So, in 1895 the main Crimean trade exporting port was transferred from Sevastopol to Theodosia. Theodosia’s port infrastructures and railway line had been constructed almost exclusively to serve the grain trade.29 However, the preparatory works had begun before the commercial port officially opened. In 1891, together with the railway building, the construction of the port’s 28 29

More for a methodological model of development of Crimean port-cities, see Sydorenko, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη’, 62–68. The construction of the port was assigned to the respected engineer-lieutenant colonel, N.M. Sevchov, a professional with a multiannual experience in constructing the empire’s commercial and military ports after having undertaken, among other things, the supervision of the reparative works of Odessa’s, Liepāja’s and Yalta’s infrastructures. The plan for Theodosia’s commercial port was drafted in the framework of the Temporary Committee of the Development of Commercial Ports and with the Minister of Transport’s approval. Контракт на работы по устройству Феодосийского порта, 16-го сентября 1891 года [Contract of Contracting for the Construction of Theodosia’s Port, September 16th 1891] (St Petersburg: Tipografiia Ministerstva Putei Soobshcheniia, 1891).

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

Picture 7.2

163

Railway lines crossing the city, end of the nineteenth century

infrastructure had begun and both were completed in 1895. In 1892 the construction of the Lozovaya – Sevastopol railway line was completed from the railway’s Dzhankoy station to Theodosia, which now connected the city with the rest of the Russian Empire’s railway network (see Map 7.1). This line terminated at the port, crossing the city. The route from the city’s outskirts to the port offered the traveller a picturesque scene, with the dark blue sea revealing Theodosia’s bay on the left and the magnificent summer houses of merchants and businessmen in Mauritanian and neoclassical styles emerging from the right between parks and vineyards.30 The construction of the port city of Theodosia took place during a period distinguished for the centralisation of authorities and the restraint of liberal trends in all the domains of the empire’s administration. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the authorities realised that there was a great gap regarding a clear port and maritime transport policy. For the first time, the empire records in aggregate and very detailed reports the state of each port and its specific role. The Russian authorities understood the financial and political importance of the ports and wished to strengthen role of the state in their operation and development. Moreover, the empire realised the crucial importance of the technological developments in domestic and maritime transport. As a result, the central policy in the 1890s shifted to a protectionist 30

GAARK, fond 221, opis’ 1, delo 1113, list 2 verso.

164

Sydorenko

policy regarding the development of the Russian merchant shipping and to nationalisation regarding the railway system.31 Theodosia’s port is situated in the so-called ‘corner’ formed by the southern coast of the peninsula of Kerch and Crimea’s eastern coastline. The western part of the bay is enclosed by Theodosia cape in the south, creating an anchorage protected from all the winds and ice in winter. A quay to reinforce safe anchorage was constructed on the eastern side, on top of which a lighthouse was erected.32 When the necessary dredging operations in the bay were completed, the port’s aquatic part stretched to an area of 300 square miles and a depth of seven metres. To the west, the bay was protected by the Sirokii mole, where the railways terminated and where many quays stretched. At the mole seagoing vessels with a maximum draft of seven metres were able to dock; these ships were mostly loaded with bulk cargoes. Temporary grain wharves were situated next to the quays and the imported products were usually piled up at the open spaces. A special pier for seagoing vessels with a maximum draft of eight metres, as well as for the ships of the Russian Steam Navigation and Trading Company (RSNTC), was located at the end of the sea wall, along with one of the latter’s warehouses.33 Next came the so-called ‘oblique’ quay; the western quay and part of the southern quay – 640 metres in total – was used exclusively for the anchorage of big seagoing ships that transported grains. The second part of the southern quay was designated mainly for the anchoring of coastal ships and sailing ships carrying charcoal, construction materials and timber. Smaller ships anchored at the inlet of the bay that stretched until the protecting pier to the east, since the depth of the water was six metres. The RSNTC also owned a wooden pier on that spot. Fourteen ships could be loaded and unloaded at the same time in the port, quite a small number in comparison with all the other southern ports. The terrestrial part of the port was a single continuous area of land which had been backfilled during its construction. This was the area where the 31 32 33

Sydorenko, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη’, 118–25. GAARK, fond 221, opis’ 1, delo 1113, list 5–5 verso. The Russian Steam Navigation and Trading Company was a state-subsidised liner company that was founded in 1856 in Odessa. This company was created with a dual purpose: firstly, to create a steamship fleet that could be used by necessity in wartime to transport troops and artillery or be converted to warships, and secondly to take part of the maritime transport market from the Black Sea ports to the Mediterranean, Northern Europe and the Far East using the Russian flag. It had received a wide gamut of privileges compared to private foreign shipping companies that operated in the Russian Black Sea market, which helped to consolidate its position and increase the participation of the Russian flag. The RSNTC could build quays, warehouses and moles, and use them only for RSNTC needs.

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

Picture 7.3

165

The port area, end of the nineteenth century

administrative buildings, the grain wharves and the companies’ offices were located. There were many railway shunts on the port’s northern side. The customs office was located in the southern part of the port. The parts of the port that had no buildings were usually used to temporarily store grains, construction materials, charcoal and cotton, since the warehouses located at the port and in the city were often unable to cover the increasing needs of the commercial traffic.34 Theodosia’s port was built to serve as an export grain gateway, and for this purpose a total of twenty-six grain wharves were constructed in different periods, twenty-three of which belonged to the Ministry of Transport.35 Twenty-one of the above were made of iron and were temporary; however, they were used for over fifteen years. The total granary capacity did not exceed 19,656 tons. The grain wharves were rented to the merchants and the exporters. Moreover, the Ministry of Transport owned two silos made of stone, with a total capacity of 11,466 tons, of which only a part was rented out for storing grain. Additionally, there was a four-storey silo in the port, with a total capacity of 2,359 tons that belonged to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, and which had grain-lifting mechanisms, although due to their bad condition they

34 35

GAARK, fond 221, opis’ 1, delo 1113, list 4–11. GAARK, fond 221, opis’ 1, delo 1113, list 7.

166

Sydorenko

were not fully used. Furthermore, the same Ministry owned two stone warehouses located at the western quay. The unsuitability of the port’s state granaries, as well as the lack of privately owned silos, created serious problems for the exporters, who were repeatedly and in vain asking for a solution. All merchant and business requests to build privately owned grain wharves within the borders of the port were repeatedly denied by the Ministry of Transport, which was opposed to the presence of the private sector within the port’s borders. It is obvious that the Ministry did not want to lose the income from renting out its property. This resulted in the creation of a network of small privately owned grain wharves in various part of the city.36 The existence of an extensive network of grain wharves and silos in a newly formed market came in response to the ever-increasing demands and changes. The railway line that connected Theodosia with its natural grain hinterland expanded significantly and contributed to the increasing development of the port. The natural grain hinterland of Theodosia, located in the northeastern part of the peninsula, expanded and included regions of Tavrida, Ekaterinoslav and Kharkov (see Map 7.1). During the periods 1901–3 and 1908–11, an average of 30% of the total freight arriving in Theodosia came by rail from the Ekaterinoslav region; the largest freight share – that is, 63% – originated from the Tavrida region; 4% came from the Kharkov region and the remaining 3% from other regions.37 The data in Table 7.1 indicate that the quantity of the exported cargo was larger than the volume of the freight arriving by rail to the port of Theodosia. This difference in numbers can be explained by the fact that, apart from the freight from Kharkov – that is, the deeper hinterland  – the port of Theodosia also served its own natural hinterland, which provided products ranging from 4% up to 38% of the total exports. What is more, we should not take into consideration only the grain production of a certain year; the grains of the previous crop season were likely stored in grain wharves in the city and port of Theodosia. It is clearly evident that the export hinterland

36 37

Отчет о деятельности Биржевого комитета Феодосийской Биржи за 1908–1909 год [Report on the Operation of the Burse Committee of Theodosia, 1908–1909] (Theodosia, 1910), 7. Mikhail Davidov, ‘Transport of Grain to the Ports of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, 1893–1913’ in Mikhail Davidov, Gelina Harlaftis and Vladimir Kulikov (eds), The Economic Development of the Port-cities of the Northern and Southern Black Sea Coast, 19th–Beginning of the 20th Century: Transport, Industry and Finance, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 4 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming), www.blacksea.gr.

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

167

of the Theodosia port city – that is, the grain-producing territories from where the cargo comes – could be described as a bulk cargo hinterland.38 Although the port infrastructure was essentially constructed from the outset, creating a new port in the area, much more had to be done. The most significant shortcomings were related to the lack of technically equipped silos and cargo-handling equipment that could provide further improvements to increase exporting grain trade and port traffic. These were not resolved due to limited state funding and a policy restricting private investments in the sector of port infrastructure. 3

External Trade, Traffic and Foreland

Apart from the internal factors that we have explained above, the international conjuncture, the international European and peripheral environment, formed the trade and shipping activities of Crimea’s ports. Grain, one of the basic bulk cargoes of international sea trade during the second half of the nineteenth century, was the main transported product from the Eastern Mediterranean, and mostly from the Black Sea, to Western Europe and became the main reason for the development of Crimea’s ports. The Black Sea ports became the main providers of grain to meet the European market’s demands. The creation of Theodosia as a main export gate turned the port city into one of the Black Sea ports that served the growing demand for foodstuff for the increasing urban population of the Western European industrial centres. The external trade of the port city of Theodosia, as indicated in Figure 7.2, mainly consisted of grain exports – that is, 93% of the total value of exports. Wheat and barley were the first two types of grain cultivated in southern Russia in general, but also in Theodosia’s hinterland, whereas in the period between 1896 and 1914, 68% of sowing pertained to wheat and 26% to barley.39 38

39

For more information on the types of hinterland, see: Arthur J. Sargent, Seaports and Hinterlands (London: A. & C. Black, 1938), 1–25; Edward L. Ullman, Mobile Industrial Seaport and Trade Centre (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1943); James H. Bird, The Geography of the Port of London (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1947); F.W. Morgan, ‘Observations on the Study of Hinterlands in Europe’, Tidschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 42 (December 1951), 366; D. Mihelic, The Political Element in the Port Geography of Trieste, Research paper no. 12 (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1969); James H. Bird, Seaports and Seaport Terminals (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1971). Socratis Petmezas, George Kostelenos and Alexandra Papadopoulou (eds), with the collaboration of Marios Emmanouil, The Development of 24 Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 8 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming), www.blacksea.gr.

168

Sydorenko

Figure 7.2

Comparative view of total exports and total grain exports of the Theodosia, 1856–1914 (in French gold francs) Source: Socratis Petmezas, George Kostelenos and Alexandra Papadopoulou (eds), with the collaboration of Marios Emmanouil, The Development of 24 Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 8 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming 2019), www.blacksea.gr

The markets that imported grain from Theodosia presented a fragmented picture of a big number of various European countries. In Figure 7.3 we can see that from 1896 to 190740 Theodosia’s cereals were transferred to more than ten countries. However, we should note that under no circumstances were all those countries also consumer markets for Theodosia’s grain; they were likely serving as transit points, as was most probably the case for Gibraltar, for example. The countries holding the first three positions in importing Theodosia’s grain were the Netherlands, France and Italy. This ranking confirms the specialisation of Theodosia’s grain market in the high-quality winter hard wheat cultivated in Crimea, which was preferred by Swiss bakeries and Italy’s pasta factories. 40

We must bear in mind that the recorded time period does not stop in 1907 because we set a special time limit, but because the Russian statistical authorities ceased to keep statistical records of the destination countries in the years that followed.

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

Figure 7.3

169

Destination countries of grain exports from Theodosia, 1896–1907 Source: Socratis Petmezas, George Kostelenos and Alexandra Papadopoulou (eds), with the collaboration of Marios Emmanouil, The Development of 24 Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 8 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming 2019), www.blacksea.gr

Wheat was transported to Switzerland via Rotterdam and Marseille;41 these last two port cities occupied the first places among the cities that received the grains shipped from Theodosia. Great Britain, which traditionally also preferred winter wheat, came in fourth place with 9%.42 The ‘foreland’ of Theodosia – that is, the ports to which its cargoes went – was defined and formed in direct connection to the trading houses and businessman that handled the trade and maritime traffic in these ports. The development of the external trade from Theodosia brought about important changes to the business community operating at this port. The basic change is the appearance of the international trading and shipping houses in the port; these international trading houses took over the grain-exporting business, 41 42

Pavel N. Martsinovskii, ‘Крым в международной торговле (1856–1914)’ [Crimea in International Trade (1856–1914)] (PhD thesis, M.V. Frunze State University of Simferopol, 1997), 155. Отчет о деятельности, 70–71.

170

Sydorenko

filling the gaps of the preceding limited business activities of the local merchants. The latter did not manage to develop trade relations and bonds with the markets of the Black Sea and Europe in the previous years, but only with other southern Russian ports or with the northern coast of the Black Sea. The number of foreign merchants and international trading houses involved in the grain-exporting trade in the port of Theodosia was directly linked to the size and the location of the hinterland that provided the grains to be exported. The city’s connection to the country’s railway network gave the international trading houses the opportunity to get exportable grains from the hinterland that lies beyond Crimea, and the local merchant the chance to base their exporting activity on Theodosia’s hinterland.43  Since the early years of the port’s grain export activities, trading houses, headquartered in other southern Russian ports, seem to take on trading activities by opening branch offices in Theodosia’s port. Such were the cases of the trading houses of S. Barzanskii, based in Odessa, or of Smulian, headquartered in Nikolayev.44 Later on, in the 1910s, we distinguish two categories of traders: the local merchants and the international trading houses which held branch offices in the city. As we can see in Table 7.2, the largest grain exporter is the trading house of Tubino Bros and Co; it was founded on 21 May 1909 in Theodosia by the Italian businessmen Cesar, Regolo and Tito Tubino with a capital of 100,000 rubles. The trading house exported grain mostly to Rotterdam and then to Genoa, Marseilles, Naples and Hamburg.45 Furthermore, one of the local merchants and trading houses active in grain export trade was the Karaite merchant family Krym, who mostly exported grain to Rotterdam. Another merchant family involved in Theodosia’s grain trade was the Durante family, who founded the company Gustav Durante Company on 30 April 1913.46 Although its name does not appear on the exporters’ register, the Genoese merchant family’s presence in the city dates back to the early nineteenth century. Other than the local merchants, international commercial companies such as Neufeld and Co. and Louis Dreyfus and Co. were also involved in the grain export trade at Theodosia’s port. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Neufeld and Co., with a central office based in Berlin, and the French-Jewish merchant house of 43 44 45 46

Sydorenko, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη’, 110–16, 186–7. Крымский Вестник [Crimean Herald], no. 38, 18 February 1895, 3. Сборник сведений о действующих в России Торговых домах (товариществах полных и на вере) [Collection of Data on the Trading Houses That Operate in Russia] (St Petersburg: Ministerstvo Torgovli I Promyshlennosti, 1912), 184. Сборник сведений о действующих в России Торговых домах (товариществах полных и на вере) [Collection of Data on the Trading Houses That Operate in Russia] (St Petersburg: Ministerstvo Torgovli I Promyshlennosti, 1915), 33.

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

171

Dreyfus became the biggest grain-exporting companies in South Russia, with more than 120 branches throughout the Russian Empire.47 The merchants that operated at Theodosia not only defined the port’s foreland but also linked the port with the hinterland. The business practices of the local grain merchants and the representatives of the large foreign trading houses in Theodosia could be divided into three categories. The first commercial practice was the one usually adopted by the representatives of the foreign companies: the head office sent by telegraph a direct purchase order describing the terms of the grain purchases to the branch office in southern Russia. After the branch offices ensured the freight purchase from the hinterland, they sent them by rail to Theodosia in order to trans-ship them abroad. The second trading practice consisted of pre-selling: in order to secure the provision of grain at the peak of the market demand, the merchant or company representative/agent would contact the producer early in the spring and in the summer, offering to buy the harvest in advance. They did not agree on or fix the price of the grain right at that moment, but the buyer had to sign a written agreement where he pledged to purchase the entire harvest at the actual market price of the day he would receive the shipment. If the seller needed a deposit, the merchant would not hesitate to give it. The merchants employing this purchasing method were highly experienced, were usually familiar with the arable land of each producer and, finally, were specialists in observing the climate conditions and foreseeing each year’s harvest. The third trading method, which was usually adopted by the local merchants, was the purchase of grain from the local producers of the fertile Crimean steppe. The producers were, as a general rule, regular clients of the merchants, and this practice was exclusively founded on trust. The producer sent the shipment by rail or by carts to the buyer without asking if it was needed. He would then come to the city and, after the two sides compared the quantities recorded in each of their registers, they would start negotiating about the price. The buyer purchased grains from different producers and at different prices; he then stored them in the silos he rented in the city and waited for the best prices the city’s exporters could offer. On the basis of the same trust, the intermediary dealer sold them to the exporters. In this particular case, no contract was signed either; they proceeded with the same oral agreements that used to take place in the world’s largest grain freight market,

47

For the role of Neufeld and Dreyfus Companies in the grain trade of South Russia, see Morozan, Деловая жизнь, 222–72, Sifneos and Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής, 501–23; Zolotov, Хлебный экспорт, 224–45; GAARK, fond 221. opis’ 1, deli 1113, folio 21–22 verso.

172

Sydorenko

the Baltic Exchange in London, where the motto was ‘my word is my bond’.48 Likewise, in Theodosia transactions were sealed by phrases such as ‘as I had promised to you’ or ‘as agreed’.49 Unlike the rest of the ports situated on the northern coast of the Black Sea, such as Odessa or Taganrog, where trade was mainly conducted by the business networks of the Greek merchant communities, the situation developed rather differently in Theodosia. The Greek merchant houses became the biggest exporting firms of southern Russia. The Rodocanachi, Ralli, Papudoff, Avierino, Scaramangas, Sifneos, Valiagno and others merchant families were handling goods valued at millions of rubles, controlling the exporting market and overseas commerce from the biggest port cities of the Russian Black Sea, including Odessa, Taganrog and Rostov-on-Don, to the Eastern European markets.50 In the case of the port city of Theodosia, the majority of the grain exports were handled by Jewish, Italian and Karaite trading houses with headquarters in countries on the Mediterranean Sea and Northern Europe or in other southern Russian cities. The rather loose relation and interaction between hinterland and port city – probably combined with the lower profits and late development of Theodosia in comparison to Odessa or the Azov ports – became an inhibitory factor for the establishment of Greek merchants or other wealthy entrepreneurs at an earlier stage, depriving the port of strong business commercial and maritime networks. We have presented a view of the creation and growth of ports in South Russia, placing a particular port at the heart of our analysis. The success of the commercial prosperity of the port relied on interdependent variables such as political and geo-strategic decisions, the features and productivity of the hinterland and landward linkages, physical limits of the port and port 48 49 50

Hugh Barty-King, The Baltic Exchange (London: Hutchinson Benham, 1977). GAARK, fond 369, opis’ 1, deli 504, folio 21–22 verso. Further on the expansion of the Greek commercial networks in Odessa and the ports of the Sea of Azov: Sifneos and Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Ο “πολυεκατομμυριούχος κύριος Μαράκης” Βαλλιάνος, το σκάνδαλο του Τελωνείου Ταγκανρόκ και οι 144 καταστροφές του Αντόν Τσέχωφ’ [The ‘Multimillionaire Mr Marakis’ Vagliano, the Scandal of the Taganrog Customs and the 144 Catastrophes of Anton Chekhov], Ta Istorika 28/54 (June 2011), 79–123; Herlihy, Odessa: A History; Kardasis, Έλληνες ομογενείς; Sifneos, ‘Οι αλλαγές στο ρωσικό σιτεμπόριο’; Sifneos, Έλληνες έμποροι στην Αζοφική; Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou, ‘The Greek Merchant House of the Russian Black Sea: A Nineteenth-century Example of a Trader’s Coalition’, International Journal of Maritime History 10/1 (June 1998), 61–104; Maria Christina Chatziioannou ‘Greek Merchant Networks in the Age of Empires (1700–1780)’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York: Berg, 2005), 371–82.

173

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

infrastructures, transport system and the size and strength of the city’s merchant community. The presentation and analysis of these variables concerning Theodosia’s development led to the successful, albeit short-term operation of a new port placed among a plurality of other export ports in the Black Sea region, a port whose creation was the result of a governmental decision, which had woken suddenly from the hibernation of the previous decades. By the beginning of the twentieth century, Theodosia had managed to respond and follow the process of interconnection of the Crimea and the Black Sea with the world market. The radical change brought to the region by the 1917 revolution, and the final prevalence of the Soviets, sealed the fate of the commercial port. However, in the twentieth century the port and the sea remained the main driving forces for the development of the city. Theodosia developed as a touristic centre, alongside an important military-industrial complex of the region. Table 7.1

Appendix Ratio of grain freights arriving by rail and exports from Theodosia, 1894–1913 (in tons)

1894 Railroad Exports 1895 Railroad Exports 1896 Railroad Exports 1897 Railroad Exports 1898 Railroad Exports 1899 Railroad Exports 1900 Railroad Exports 1901 Railroad Exports 1902 Railroad Exports

Wheat

Rye

56,183.4 88,126.9 38,771.4 64,497.2 73,611.7 90,617.1 113,169.4 119,339.7 108,845.1 127,449.9 67,338.1 106,421.8 89,352.9 120,625.7 68,828.7 86,671.6 135,528.1 160,776.8

737.1 1,333.1 999.1 1,258.3 917.2 981.2 4,979.5 3,315.2 8,370.1 7,805.8 3,636.3 4,830.5 3,472.5 3,087.8 3,669.1 4,300.6 48,828.7 39,712.1

Barley 26,158.8 42,733.5 25,208.8 36,013.5 43,701.8 61,226.6 44,176.8 60,246.2 75,118.6 79,894.4 22,080.2 39,871.8 3,013.9 4,288.9 19,574.1 18,958.6 63,554.4 72,163.3

Oat

Total

3,636.3 8,221.0 4,766.5 7,547.8 6,732.1 10,798.7 9,893.5 15,939.3 6,175.2 4,721.8 10,008.1 5,898.6 18,443.8 17,041.8 3,619.9 2,500.0 7,714.9 3,773.7

86,715.6 140,414.5 69,745.8 109,316.8 124,962.8 163,623.6 172,219.2 198,840.4 198,509 219,871.9 103,062.7 157,022.7 114,283.1 145,044.2 95,691.8 112,430.8 255,626.1 276,425.9

61.76% 63.8% 76.37% 86.61% 90.28% 65.64% 78.79% 85.11% 92.48%

174 Table 7.1

Sydorenko Ratio of grain freights arriving by rail and exports from Theodosia, 1894–1913 (in tons) (cont.)

1903 Railroad Exports 1904 Railroad Exports 1905 Railroad Exports 1906 Railroad Exports 1907 Railroad Exports 1908 Railroad Exports 1909 Railroad Exports 1910 Railroad Exports 1911 Railroad Exports 1912 Railroad Exports 1913 Railroad Exports

Wheat

Rye

Barley

Oat

Total

139,442.9 164,222.8 163,275.8 243,704.1 187,108.7 259,120.6 146,666.5 181,220.8 135,184.1 151,737.5 99,180.9 104,780.2 244,684.4 263,766.5 249,647.5 263,741.9 202,424.0 252,802.3 130,401.1 174,524.0 167,157.9 56,183.4

20,786.2 31,148.0 15,823.0 12,709.7 10,859.9 10,890.9 7,534.8 10,328.4 2,063.8 2,851.7 655.2 572.5 4,144.1 2,878.6 6,797.7 4,249.6 7,174.4 9,210.0 1,621.6 2,009.1 1,162.9 737.1

105,159.6 107,165.5 101,785.3 107,586.9 98,411.0 147,053.5 84,700.9 95,902.0 14,496.3 19,041.7 41,261.2 40,702.1 55,036.8 52,437.8 75,069.5 85,082.8 93,726.3 118,817.6 30,286.6 42,892.1 46,846.8 26,158.8

15,315.3 11,208.4 12,956.5 16,293.8 10,581.4 14,056.8 6,928.7 12,766.7 3,767.4 262.1 6,191.6 455.4 5,470.9 1,194.2 6,945.1 166.3 9,254.7 9,907.5 10,450.4 436.5 10,532.3 3,636.3

280,704 313,744.7 293,840.6 380,294.5 306,961 431,121.8 245,830.9 300,217.9 155,511.6 173,893 147,288.9 146,510.2 309,336.2 320,277.1 338,459.8 353,240.6 312,579.4 390,737.4 172,759.7 219,861.7 225,699.9 86,715.6

89.47% 77.27% 71.2% 81.88% 89.43% 100% 96.58% 95.82% 80% 78.58% 91.66%

Source: Socratis Petmezas, George Kostelenos and Alexandra Papadopoulou (eds), with the collaboration of Marios Emmanouil, The Development of 24 Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 8 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming), www.blacksea.gr Mikhail Davidov, ‘Transport of Grain to the Ports of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, 1893–1913’ in Mikhail Davidov, Gelina Harlaftis and Vladimir Kulikov (eds), The Economic Development of the Port-cities of the Northern and Southern Black Sea Coast, 19th–Beginning of the 20th Century: Transport, Industry and Finance, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 4 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming), www.blacksea.gr

175

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea Table 7.2 Grain exporters in Theodosia, 1910–13

Exporters

Grain exports Grain exports (in chetverta) (in chetvert) 1911 1910

Tubino Bros 892,636 L. Dreyfus and Co. 628,475 N.B. Rathaus 223,889 M. Neufeld and Co. 205,888 Dall’ Orso 71,467 M. Fleischman and 60,664 Co. W.C.W. Von Stürler 58,715 *** Krym 47,840 Krym Company 43,250 Bayer 16,480 14,672 National Commercial Bank of Saint Petersburg Voog and Co. G. Strang P. Bayer Russian Bank Oberschmukler Bros L.M. Tsigrinskii Andreas Markovich Karassarinis Commercial Bank of Odessa Total 2,264,036

Grain exports Grain exports (in chetvert) (in chetvert) 1913 1912

874,919 724,985 289,640 187,774

396,970 299,479 182,796 47,871

-

180,555

63,870 27,469 70,143 24,365 32,379

71,692

116,429

82,846

204,836 503,424 231,955

58,489 176,044

32,684 112,216

65,820 36,125

157,573 49,325 46,885 4,125 14,850

68,954

-

19,940 42,369 28,942 16,095 3,280

-

-

1,260

2,480,960

1,416,466

1,652,572

625 -

a 1 chetvert equals 209.91 litres or 5.772 bushels. Source: Отчет о деятельности Биржевого комитета Феодосийской Биржи за 1910 год [Report on the Operation of the Burse Committee of Theodosia, 1910] (Theodosia, 1911), 70–71; Отчет о деятельности Биржевого комитета Феодосийской Биржи за 1911 год [Report on the Operation of the Burse Committee of Theodosia, 1911] (Theodosia, 1912), 108–9, Отчет о деятельности Биржевого комитета Феодосийской Биржи за 1912 год [Report on the Operation of the Burse Committee of Theodosia, 1912] (Theodosia, 1913), 102–3.

176

Sydorenko

Bibliography Bartlett Roger P., Human Capital: The Settlement of Foreigners in Russia 1762–1804 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979). Barty-King Hugh, The Baltic Exchange (London: Hutchinson Benham, 1977). Beloousova Lilia, Το γένος των Πετροκόκκινων, περίοδος της Οδησσού 19ος–αρχές 20ου αιώνα [The Family of Petrokokkinos, Odessa Period, 19th–Early 20th Century] (Chios: Alpha Pi, 2007). Morozan Vladimir, Деловая жизнь на юге России в XIX–начале XX века [The Business Life in the Russian South, 19th–Beginning of the 20th Century] (St Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin, 2014). Bird James H., Seaports and Seaport Terminals (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1971). Bird James H., The Geography of the Port of London (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1947). Chatziioannou Maria Christina, ‘Greek Merchant Networks in the Age of Empires (1700–1780)’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York: Berg, 2005). Davidov Mikhail, ‘Transport of Grain to the Ports of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, 1893–1913’ in Mikhail Davidov, Gelina Harlaftis and Vladimir Kulikov (eds), The Economic Development of the Port-cities of the Northern and Southern Black Sea Coast, 19th–Beginning of the 20th Century: Transport, Industry and Finance, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 4 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming), www.blacksea.gr. Druzhinina Elena, Северное Причерноморье в 1775–1800 гг. [The Northern Coast of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov in 1775–1800] (Moscow: Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR). Eklof Ben, John Bushnell and Larissa Zakharova (eds), Russia’s Great Reforms, 1855–1881 (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1994). Fokas Spyridon, Οι Έλληνες εις την ποταμοπλοίαν του Κάτω Δουνάβεως [The Greeks on the River-traffic of the Lower Danube] (Thessaloniki: Idrima Meleton Xersonisou tou Aimou, 1975). Fotiadis Dimitrios, Η Επανάσταση του 1821 [The Greek Revolution of 1821] (Athens: Votsis, 1977). Friesen Leonard, Rural Revolutions in Sothern Ukraine (Harvard: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 2008). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Maritime Transport Systems in Southeastern Mediterranean’ in Edhem Eldem and Socrates Petmezas (eds), The Economic Development of Southeastern Europe in the 19th Century (Athens: Historical Archives Alpha Bank, 2011). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Ο “πολυεκατομμυριούχος κύριος Μαράκης” Βαλλιάνος, το σκάνδαλο του Τελωνείου Ταγκανρόκ και οι 144 καταστροφές του Αντόν Τσέχωφ’ [The ‘Multimillionaire

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

177

Mr Marakis’ Vagliano, the Scandal of the Taganrog Customs and the 144 Catastrophes of Anton Chekhov], Ta Istorika 28/54 (June 2011), 79–122. Harlaftis Gelina, Ιστορία της Ελληνόκτητης Ναυτιλίας, 19ος–20ος αιώνας [A History of Greek-owned Shipping in the 19th and 20th Centuries] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001). Herlihy Patricia, Odessa: A History, 1794–1914 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1986). Jackson Gordon, The History and Archaeology of Ports (Tadworth: Littlehampton Book Services Ltd, 1983). Kardasis Vasilis, Έλληνες ομογενείς στη Νότια Ρωσία, 1775–1861 [The Greeks in Southern Russia 1775–1861] (Athens: Alexandria, 1998). Kelly W.J., ‘Railroad Development and Market Integration in Tsarist Russia: Evidence on Oil Products and Grain’, Journal of Economic History 36/4 (December 1976), 908–16. Kitanina Taisia M., Хлебная торговля России в конце ХІХ-начале ХХ веков: стратегия выживания, модернизационные процессы, правительственная политика [Russia’s Grain Trade between the End of the 19th and the Beginning of the 20th Century: Strategy of Survival, Modernisation Processes, Government Policy] (St Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin, 2011). Kontogeorgis Dimitrios, ‘Η ελληνική διασπορά στη Ρουμανία: η περίπτωση της ελληνικής παροικίας της Βραΐλας (περ. 1820–1914)’ [Greek Diaspora in Romania: The Case Study of the Greek paroikia of Braila (c. 1820–1914)] (PhD thesis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 2012). Koromila Marianna, The Greeks in the Black Sea: From the Bronze Age to the Early Twentieth Century (Athens: Panorama, 1991). Lincoln W.B., The Great Reforms: Autocracy, Bureaucracy and the Politics of Change in Imperial Russia (De Kalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1990). Martsinovskii Pavel N., ‘Крым в международной торговле (1856–1914)’ [Crimea in International Trade (1856–1914)] (PhD thesis, M.V. Frunze State University of Simferopol, 1997). Metzer Jacob, ‘Railroad Development and Market Integration: The Case of Tsarist Russia’, Journal of Economic History 34/3 (September 1974), 529–50. Metzer Jacob, ‘Some Economic Aspects of Railroad Development in Tsarist Russia’, Journal of Economic History 33/1 (March 1973), 314–16. Mihelic D., The Political Element in the Port Geography of Trieste, Research paper no. 12 (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1969). Morgan F.W., ‘Observations on the Study of Hinterlands in Europe’, Tidschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 42 (December 1951), 366–371. Mosse W.E., Alexander II and the Modernization of Russia (London: IB Tauris & Co Ltd, 1993).

178

Sydorenko

Novikova Svitlana, ‘Внесок греків в економічний розвиток Північного Приазов’я (друга половина ХІХ–початок ХХ ст.)’ [Contribution of the Greeks to the Economic Development of the Northern Azov Sea (Second Half of the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries)] (PhD thesis, National Academy of Ukraine/Institute of History of Ukraine, 2012). Papoulides Konstantinos, Γρηγόριος Γ. Μαρασλής (1831–1907): Η ζωή και το έργο του [Grigorios G. Maraslis (1831–1907): His Life and Work] (Thessaloniki: Idryma Meleton Chersonesou tou Aimou, 1989). Pepelasis Minoglou Ioanna, ‘The Greek Merchant House of the Russian Black Sea: A Nineteenth-century Example of a Trader’s Coalition’, International Journal of Maritime History 10/1 (June 1998), 61–104. Pereira N.G.O., Tsar-Liberator: Alexander II of Russia, 1818–1881 (Newtonville: Oriental Research Partners, 1983). Petmezas Socratis, George Kostelenos and Alexandra Papadopoulou (eds), with the collaboration of Marios Emmanouil, The Development of 24 Black Sea Port-cities: A Statistical Approach, Black Sea History Project Working Papers, vol. 8 (Corfu: Ionian University, forthcoming), www.blacksea.gr. Pospelova Ialia, ‘Становление внешней торговли России через Азовские и Черноморские порты в последней четверти XVIII–начале XIX века’ [The Creation of Russia’s Exporting Trade Through the Ports of the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea during the Last Quarter of the 18th–Beginning of the 19th Century] (PhD thesis, Moscow Region State University, 2012). Prousis Theophilus C., Russian Society and the Greek Revolution (Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press, 1994). Sargent Arthur J., Seaports and Hinterlands (London: A. & C. Black, 1938). Shliakhov Oleksiy, Судновласники і моряки Азово-Чорноморського басейну наприкінці XIX–на початку XX ст. [Shipowners and Seafarers in the Black and Azov Seas (Late 19th–Early 20th Centuries)] (Dnipropetrovsk: University of Dnipropetrovsk, 2003). Sifneos Evrydiki, Imperial Odessa: Peoples, Spaces, Identities (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2018). Sifneos Evrydiki and Gelina Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες της Αζοφικής 18ος–αρχές 20ού αιώνα. Νέες προσεγγίσεις στην ιστορία των Ελλήνων της νότιας Ρωσίας [Greeks in the Azov, 18th– Beginning of 20th Century. New Approaches in the History of the Greeks in South Russia] (Athens: Institute for Historical Research/National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2015). Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Indifference and/or Egocentrism: The Greek paroikia of Odessa in the Face of Twentieth-century Social Turmoil’ in Andreas Lyberatos (ed.), Social Transformation and Mass Mobilization in the Balkan and Eastern Mediterranean Cities (1900–1923) (Herakleion: Crete University Press, 2012).

The Creation of the Main Export Port of Crimea

179

Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Diaspora Entrepreneurship Revisited: Greek Merchants and Firms in the Southern Russian Ports’, Entrepreneurship et Histoire 63 (June 2011): 40–52. Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Merchant Enterprise and Strategies in the Sea of Azov Ports’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/1 (June 2010), 259–68. Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Rentiers, Teachers and Workers: Greek Women in Late Nineteenthcentury Odessa’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 34/2 (2010): 182–200. Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Can Commercial Techniques Substitute Port Institutions? Evidence from the Greek Presence in the Black and Azov Sea Ports (1780–1850)’ in Raffaella Salvemini (ed.), Istituzioni e traffic tra età antica e crescita moderna (Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Instituto di Studi sulle Societá del Mediterraneo, 2009), 77–90. Sifneos Evrydiki, Έλληνες έμποροι στην Αζοφική, Η δύναμη και τα όρια της οικογενειακής επιχείρησης [Greek Merchants in the Sea of Azov: The Power and the Limits of Family Business] (Athens: Institute for Neohellenic Research/National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2009). Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Οι αλλαγές στο ρωσικό σιτεμπόριο και η προσαρμοστικότητα των ελληνικών εμπορικών οίκων’ [The Changes in Russian Grain Trade and the Adaptability of the Greek Trading Houses], Ta Istorika 40 (June 2004): 53–96. Sydorenko Anna, ‘Οικονομική ανάπτυξη των πόλεων-λιμανιών της Κριμαίας, β΄ μισό του 19ου–αρχές 20ου αιώνα. Ευπατορία, Σεβαστούπολη, Θεοδοσία’ [The Economic Development of the Crimean Port-cities, Second Half of the 19th, Beginning of the 20th Century. Evpatoria, Sevastopol, Theodosia] (PhD thesis, Ionian University, 2017). Ullman Edward L., Mobile Industrial Seaport and Trade Centre (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1943). Zakharov Victor, Западноевропейские купцы в российской торговле XVIII века [Western European Merchants in 18th Century Russian Trade] (Moscow: Nauka, 2005). Zolotov A., Хлебный экспорт России через порты Черного и Азовского морей в 60–90-е годы XIX века [Russia’s Exports Through the Ports of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, 1860–1890] (Rostov: University of Rostov, 1996).

Chapter 8

Beyond the Mediterranean: Greek Family Business and the Familiarity of the Black and Azov Seas Maritime Space Evrydiki Sifneos Fernand Braudel’s idea of the Mediterranean as a unit of research and inquiry that conceives space in the long timespan could be extended to the adjacent Black and Azov seas.1 The Black Sea basin is above all a geographical milieu that transcends rupture and discontinuity and deserves a geo-historical understanding which, as Braudel argues for the Mediterranean, is ‘almost immobile’ and lies beneath a ‘slowly rhythmic social history’, while the eventful history is the surface agitation.2 Despite the different countries that control parts of its shores and their varied political trajectories, the Black Sea area remained for long periods of time under the influence of empires. Names such as the ‘Miletos pond’, as it was known in antiquity, and the ‘Mare Maggiore’, as the Italian city states called it, as well as the ‘Ottoman lake’ and others reveal part of a unified history that lies beneath the fragmented national histories of the Black Sea. As Charles King puts it, the Black Sea has more often been a bridge than a barrier, linking groups of people, communities, port cities and states.3 In the era of globalisation, cooperative initiatives among the Black Sea countries at an official level, as well as grassroots activities, have prioritised the importance of the area as a field of study and common action.4 Now that global history is at stake, Braudel’s notion of économie-monde and histoire 1 Fernand Braudel, La Méditerranée et le monde méditerranéen à l’époque de Philippe II (Paris: Armand Colin, 1949). 2 Braudel, La Méditerranée, xiii. 3 Charles King, The Black Sea: A History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). 4 Official initiatives have operated within the structures of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation and the Parliamentary assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (Istanbul). Scientific research has been guided by the International Centre for Black Sea Studies (Athens). See Panagiota Manoli, The Dynamics of Black Sea Subregionalism (London: Routledge, 2012). University projects and more grassroots activities have been elaborated in the last decades. On this occasion, see, back in 1998, the Black Sea Area Research Project, whose outcome was the book Tunc Aybak (ed.), Politics of the Black Sea: Dynamics of Cooperation and Conflict (London: IB Tauris, 2001). Finally, the ‘Ionian University – Thales project – Black Sea and Port Cities from the 18th to the 20th Centuries: Development, Convergence and Interconnections

© Evrydiki Sifneos, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_009

Beyond the Mediterranean

181

totale have regained scholarly interest.5 For Braudel, total history governs all other temporalities: the eventful history, the conjunctural history and the economic/world history. As outlined in his 1948 book, Braudel thought of the Mediterranean region as primarily an economic system, a huge network of economic exchanges, that could be compared with the study of other regions. As Cheng-Chung Lai reiterates, his proposal for a total history was rather a ‘way of writing’, a methodology that encouraged interdisciplinary approaches, comparative studies and the combination of time and space dimensions.6 Building on Braudel’s legacy, Eyüp Özveren proposes a study of the Black Sea region in order to answer the question of whether it fulfils the criteria of the construction of a region within the boundaries of a modern world economy. He accords great weight to the study of the degree of integration of this potential economic unit through the convergence of prices over time and other indicators, such as seasonal migration.7 Therefore, the priority acquired by maritime regions as geographical and human – economic entities, not only in light of Braudel’s thought but also in the stream of modern scientific initiatives, encourages us to study the seas to the northeast of the Mediterranean as a single, unified region. For us Greeks, the Black Sea region was in our immediate neighbourhood. It used to be a familiar place both in terms of naming (the name Euxeinos Pontos [Hospitable Sea], was a euphemism replacing the earlier name of Axeinos Pontos [Inhospitable Sea], and was used by Greek sailors in order to wheedle the inhospitable and difficult-to-navigate waters of the Black Sea) and in terms of exploration and expansion. The ancient peoples who settled in Greece established trading posts on the coast of the Black Sea as well as their first colonies: Panticapaeum in the Strait of Kerch (seventh or sixth century BC), the city of Tanais, which was located in the Gulf of Taganrok (late third century BC), Olbia at the mouth of the River Bug, 200 kilometres east of the city of Odessa (seventh century BC). Emigration, trading posts, settlements and commercial networks constitute elements of continuity in the region’s longue durée. I would like to stress the motive of ‘stenochoria’ (lack of land), as the archaeologist Alan Greaves reiterates, and not trade per se, so as to indicate the population pressure on the creation of new settlements in the Black and Azov seas to the World Economy’, coordinated by Professor Gelina Harlaftis, which I am proud to be part of. 5 See on this subject the illuminating article, Cheng-Chung Lai, ‘Braudel’s Concepts and Methodology Reconsidered’, The European Legacy: Towards New Paradigms 5/1 (2000), 65–86. 6 Lai, ‘Braudel’s Concepts and Methodology Reconsidered’, 65–86. 7 Eyüp Özveren, ‘A Framework for the Study of the Black Sea World, 1789–1915’, Review of the Fernand Braudel Center 20/1 (Winter 1997), 77–113.

182

Sifneos

in antiquity.8 The same reason, the lack of resources and arable land in the small sized and mostly arid Aegean Islands in the eighteenth century, was the principal motivation for emigration into the newly opened trading posts of the Black Sea. Such factors were enhanced both in antiquity and at the end of the eighteenth century by political motives, changes of politevmata (political regimes/polities), upheavals, insurrections and natural calamities. In the modern era, the Russian-Ottoman wars of the eighteenth century played a key role in creating flows of emigration from the Aegean and Ionian Islands in the Black Sea’s newly born port cities. Most of the ancient settlements were either emporia, i.e. trading posts near or within a polis without a political status, or permanent settlements (apoikiai/colonies) endowed with a political status and dated from the last third of the seventh century bc.9 Miletus in Asia Minor was the most important polis involved in the colonisation of the Black Sea.10 In the early modern era, Greek merchant communities (paroikiai) were formed on the shores of the Black and Azov seas in order to populate and economically activate Russia’s newborn port cities in the southern territory recently acquired from the Ottoman Empire. From 1775 to 1814, Odessa in the Black Sea and Taganrog in the Azov Sea received the main bulk of Greek settlers from the Ionian and the Aegean Islands.11 8 9 10 11

Alan Greaves, ‘Milesians in the Black Sea: Trade, Settlement and Religion’ in http://www .pontos.dk/publications/books/bss-6-files/bss6_01_greaves (last accessed 9 May 2013). Gocha R. Tsetskhladze (ed.), The Greek Colonization of the Black Sea Area: Historical Interpretation of Archaeology (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1998). Alan M. Greaves, Miletus: A History (London: Routledge, 2002). Gelina Harlaftis and Evrydiki Sifneos, Οι Έλληνες στην Αζοφική Θάλασσα, Οικονομική Ανάπτυξη, Εμπόριο και Ναυτιλία κατά τον 19ο αιώνα [Greeks in the Azov Sea, Economic Development, Trade and Shipping in the 19th Century] (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2015). Sifneos and Harlaftis, ‘Entrepreneurship at the Russian Frontier of International Trade: The Greek Merchant Community/Paroikia of Taganrog in the Sea of Azov, 1780s–1830s’, in Viktor Zakharov, Gelina Harlaftis and Olga Katsiardi-Hering (eds), Merchant ‘Colonies’ in the Early Modern Period (15th–18th Centuries) (London: Chatto & Pickering, 2012). Evrydiki Sifneos, ‘Diaspora Entrepreneurship Revisited: Greek Merchants and Firms in the Southern Russian Ports’, Entreprises et histoire 63/2 (2011), 40–52. Evrydiki Sifneos, ‘Merchant Enterprises and Strategies in the Sea of Azov Ports’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/1 (June 2010), 259−68. See also Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Mapping the Greek Maritime Diaspora from the Early Eighteenth to the Late Nineteenth Centuries’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (Oxford and New York: Berg, 2005), 147–69; John A. Mazis, The Greeks of Odessa: Diaspora Leadership in Late Imperial Russia (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004); Vassilis Kardasis, Diaspora Merchants in the Black Sea: The Greeks in Southern Russia, 1775–1861 (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2001); Ioannis K. Hassiotis, Οι Έλληνες της Ρωσίας και της Σοβιετικής Ένωσης [The Greeks of Russia

Beyond the Mediterranean

183

The Black Sea, once considered as an inner sea of the Mediterranean, and the Azov, as its liver-shaped extension, were thought of as inhospitable and dangerous areas for navigation. Yet, the Greeks who often ventured in their waters were trained under adverse circumstances and knew their shores and navigation routes. With Odessa as the central settlement in the Black Sea and Taganrog in the Azov, Greek seafarers and merchants were able to organise the beginnings of the Russian grain trade and establish trading companies in the area. Their competitive advantage vis a vis other foreign entrepreneurs resided in four features: a) their know-how in organising trade under primitive conditions; b) their geographical proximity to the Black Sea region and their strong financial and organisational basis in Istanbul; c) their religious affinity with the Russian people; and d) their adaptability to the changing patterns of the grain trade throughout the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth.12 Greek firms in the region, regardless of their size, were family-controlled and had a dual character: they offered both trading and transport services.13 This last feature proved to be very important in the organisation of the import – export business in the Black and Azov seas, because the Russian Empire until the second half of the nineteenth century lacked a merchant fleet. Before settling in the Black Sea, many firms had already established branches in the principal European ports that coordinated the grain trade between the Eastern and the Western Mediterranean. Odessa’s big capital-intensive firms dominated the city’s grain trade from the 1830s to the 1850s.14 The family component of the firm benefitted from certain advantages. It reduced the managerial costs for coordination and monitoring of its branches, it offered a pool for capital financing and human resources among family members and a broader circle of relatives. The family firm relied on trust and benefitted from trustworthy information wherever its members lived (although this was usually in Istanbul and the Mediterranean port cities). Family firms were more often than not predisposed to quick decision making and adaptability to major changes, while in times of recession they kept the long-term family perspective and struggled for the shared dream of their members. Their vulnerability resided in the transmission of leadership, and it was difficult to overcome a three-generation lifecycle.

12 13 14

and the Soviet Union] (Salonica: University Studio Press, 1997); Gelina Harlaftis, A History of the Greek-owned Shipping, 19th–20th Centuries (London: Routledge, 1993); Patricia Herlihy, Odessa: A History (1797–1914) (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1986). Sifneos, ‘Diaspora Entrepreneurship Revisited’, 40–52. Evrydiki Sifneos, ‘Greek Family Firms in the Azov Sea, 1850–1917’, Business History Review 87/2 (July 2013), 294–302; Sifneos, ‘Merchant Enterprises and Strategies’, 259–68. Kardasis, Diaspora Merchants in the Black Sea.

184 1

Sifneos

The Case of a Port City: Taganrog in the Sea of Azov

Taganrog in the Sea of Azov was an exceptional place where Greek entrepreneurship had strong roots. An exhaustive investigation into the Rostov-on-Don state archives allowed us to track the trajectory of the Greek community and follow its rhythms of growth and decline. It elucidated and gave responses to questions about the how and why of the supremacy of the Greek entrepreneurial networks in the Sea of Azov maritime region.15 Perched on a peninsula on the banks of the Azov Sea, Taganrog presented a challenge for those who wished to venture their small capitals and to test their trading and maritime skills in order to render this port accessible to the international market. Catherine the Great’s open call to Greek seafarers and their families to settle in Taganrog (28 March 1775) guaranteed them housing and a place for worship, tax breaks, incentives for trade and self-governing institutions. On the other hand, the peculiarities of the geographical area raised many problems for a successful enterprise. The Azov Sea’s shallow waters, the lack of harbours and port infrastructure, the adverse weather conditions and the freezing of the sea between November and March were some of the dangers that Greek merchants encountered and had to avoid. Therefore, the region was a high-risk area that discouraged foreign merchants, especially during the first period of the city’s foundation. As Gelina Harlaftis has indicated, the maritime expertise of the Greeks corresponded to Catherine’s prerequisites in order to create a viable economic zone in the region. Forty islands in the Aegean and the Ionian seas, under different sovereignties (Venetian, French, Ottoman, English) had already acquired great experience in the Mediterranean Sea trade, and 1,000 Greek-owned seagoing ships constructed a commercial and maritime web that linked the Eastern to the Western Mediterranean.16 From the Greek Magistrate’s register 15

16

The results of this research are in press: Gelina Harlaftis and Evrydiki Sifneos, ‘Tο Ταϊγάνιο των Ελλήνων: ελληνική επιχειρηματικότητα στην παραμεθόριο του διεθνούς εμπορίου’ [Taganrog of the Greeks: Greek Entrepreneurship in the Frontier of International Trade] in Harlaftis and Sifneos, Οι Έλληνες στην Αζοφική Θάλασσα; see also Sifneos and Harlaftis, ‘Entrepreneurship at the Russian Frontier of International Trade’, 137–79. Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700–1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821] (Athens, forthcoming); Sifneos and Harlaftis, ‘Entrepreneurship at the Russian Frontier of International Trade’, 137–79; Michela d’Angelo, Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassalo (eds), Making Waves in the Mediterranean: Sulle onde del Mediterraneo, Proceedings of the 2nd Conference of the Mediterranean Maritime History Network, Messina and Taormina, 4–7 May 2006, Istituto di Studi Storici Gaetano Salvemini (Messina, 2010); Gelina Harlaftis, ‘The “Eastern Invasion”: Greeks in the Mediterranean Trade and Shipping in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries’

Beyond the Mediterranean

185

(1795–1804), 583 merchants were allocated to the three merchant guilds, ten of them in the first, 262 in the second and 311 in the third.17 Along with their families, they comprised a population of 1,569 individuals of a total of 7,000 in the city of Taganrog. According to their origin, 55% came from the Ionian Islands, 17% from the Eastern Aegean, 13% from the Central Aegean and 13% from the West Aegean.18 Data on individuals reveal the chain migration process of male relatives of first and second generation that settled in Taganrog and registered in the files of the Greek Magistrate over the years 1795–1804.19 The Greek Magistrate was abolished in 1836, and subsequently Greek merchants had to enter in a common guild with Russian merchants. Their overall presence in the guild system diminished gradually: from 53.6% of the total membership in 1840, to 25.4% in 1882 and 11% in 1912.20 Yet, their participation in the transport of grain remained high: 44% (1840–60) and 35% (1860–80) of the total ships entering and clearing Taganrog were Greek-owned under various flags. The main exporter was the Cephalonian Maris Vagliano, who owned forty coastal and deep-sea vessels and was a partner in the international merchant house of Vagliano Bros.21 Their efficiency in monitoring the grain exports from the Black Sea via their London premises, Marseille and Taganrog made them diversify into shipping and banking. In 1881, a group of Greek importers, among them Maris Vagliano, as well as civil servants in Taganrog’s customs office were accused of fraud (tax evasion, forgery and smuggling).22 Four years later, the Kharkov court sentenced twelve Russians and Greeks, including the most important of all, Maris Vagliano, who was sentenced to exile and given a fine of more than 700,000 rubles; after an appeal, the latter had his

17 18 19 20 21

22

in Maria Fusaro, Colin Heywood and Mohamed-Salah Omri (eds), Trade and Cultural Exchange in the Early Modern Mediterranean: Braudel’s Maritime Legacy (London: IB Tauris, 2010), 223–52; Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping. GARO (State Archive of the Rostov-on-Don Region), fond 579, opis’ 3, delo 2, List of Merchants in the Taganrog Greek Magistrate, 1795–1804. Sifneos and Harlaftis, ‘Entrepreneurship at the Russian Frontier’, 173, Table 9.3. Sifneos and Harlaftis, ‘Entrepreneurship at the Russian Frontier’, 174–6, Table 9.6. Harlaftis and Sifneos, ‘Το Ταϊγάνιο των Ελλήνων’ [Taganrog of the Greeks], Tables 6 and 14. Gelina Harlaftis, Creating Global Shipping. Aristotle Onassis, the Vagliano Brothers and the Business of Shipping c. 1820–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019), 42–100; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘From Diaspora Traders to Shipping Tycoons: The Vagliano Bros.’, Business History Review 81/2 (Summer 2007), 237–68. For a well-known court case see also Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Ο “πολυεκατομμυριούχος κύριος Μαράκης” Βαλλιάνος, το σκάνδαλο του Τελωνείου Ταγκανρόκ και οι 144 καταστροφές του Αντόν Τσέχωφ’ [The ‘Multi-millionaire Mr. Marakis Vagliano’, the Scandal of the Taganrog Customs Office and 144 Disasters of Anton Chekhov], Ta Istorika 54 (2011), 79–122.

186

Sifneos

sentence changed to a fine of just 327,866 rubles, and was able to spend the rest of his life in Taganrog. Vagliano withdrew from active business in Taganrog, but his firm continued to operate successfully by transferring its premises to Rostov-on-Don under the management of his nephew, Michael Vagliano. The ‘Vagliano affair’ was a clear indicator of the contrasting economic interests in Imperial Russia among the Moscow industrialists and the foreign entrepreneurs of the periphery. The first demanded a more protectionist policy and the breakdown of monopolistic interests in southern Russia’s export trade.23 The Taganrog case shows how Greek entrepreneurship combined commercial and maritime activities, diversified into steam navigation and expanded to new areas of grain export activity, including Rostov-on-Don and Novorossiysk. Greeks contributed to the growth and embellishment of Taganrog by donating money and serving as mayors and as members of the municipal government’s committees in the stock exchange and the port. They presented a high degree of integration and assimilation into Russian society. In the long run, they competed successfully with other non-Russian and Russian entrepreneurs due to their family business organisation and their dense networks and international bonds, and contributed significantly to the creation of a new economic zone in the south of Russia that was gradually integrated into the world economy via the grain trade. 2

The Paradigm of a Middle-Sized Family Business in the Azov Sea: the Sifneo Frères (1850–1940)

Archival research on the Sifneo Frères family firm, a rare example of preservation of archival material that highlights a Greek firm’s performance based on family resources, was indicative for the study of Greek family firms in the Azov Sea.24 Despite the lack of documents related to the shipping business, the archive reflects the point of view of its founders and the evolution of the family business set against varying political and institutional contexts in three countries: Russia (Taganrog), the Ottoman Empire (Istanbul) and Greece (Piraeus). Given the firm’s medium size and international performance, the study has served as an indicator of the majority of the Greek diaspora’s family 23 24

Harlaftis and Sifneos, ‘Το Ταϊγάνιο των Ελλήνων’ [Taganrog of the Greeks]; Alfred J. Rieber, Merchants and Entrepreneurs in Imperial Russia (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982). Evrydiki Sifneos, Έλληνες έμποροι στην Αζοφική. Η δυναμική και τα όρια της οικογενειακής επιχείρησης [Greek Merchants in the Azov Sea: The Power and the Limits of a Family Business] (Athens: Institute of Modern Greek Research, 2009).

Beyond the Mediterranean

187

businesses in the area and their competitive advantage vis a vis other trading and shipping firms. Founded in the 1850s by four brothers from the island of Lesvos (in the northeastern Aegean), the firm held its headquarters in Taganrog (on the Azov Sea) and developed branches in Istanbul, a strategic port that regulated and controlled the export of grain from the Black and Azov seas to the European markets. It specialised in import – export activity, focusing on the importation of popular Mediterranean foodstuffs and the exportation of different varieties of grain, caviar, butter and fish. Due to the lack of means of maritime and fluvial transport in the area, the form acquired an iron barge so as to guarantee the transfer of exports to the roadstead. During the first decades of its performance, capital growth and accumulation of profits were slow, until the second generation entered the management of the firm and resolved the issues of conflicting strategies at its leadership. From 1899 to 1910, the firm gained membership in the first-class export houses and yielded good annual profits that reached an average of 14.5% of the firm’s invested capital. A foresighted investment of the trading firm’s profits in steamships in 1899 offered a way to enhance growth and survive the turbulences of the First World War and the Russian Revolution. In times of peace, ship ownership provided a more international and cosmopolitan outlook as well as the means to overcome restrictions posed by national boundaries and the closure of the Black Sea. During the critical years of the First World War, when Russia was isolated from international trade, some of its administrators moved to Greece and directed shipping through the Mediterranean and the Atlantic ports and some remained in the Russian ‘hub’ and diversified into transport and industry. The firm expanded within South Russia by opening new branches in Yeisk, Mariupol and Rostov-on-Don. New investment opportunities were explored during the international occupation of Istanbul, yet the defeat of Greece’s military expansionism in Asia Minor had severe repercussions on the economic aspirations of the Greeks in Istanbul and ended in the closing of the Istanbul branch in 1922. Inspired by Greece’s positive performance and international prestige under the leadership of the Greek statesman Eleftherios Venizelos, the Sifneo Frères invested in two industries, the refrigerator company Ep. Charilaos SA in Salonica and the acetylene and oxygen factory Eolos SA in Piraeus. Despite the shift in entrepreneurial focus from trade to industry and the economic crises of 1929– 32, the firm, equipped with modern technology and a small workforce, demonstrated stable growth and succeeded in having positive returns all through the period 1924–40.

188

Sifneos

One of the strategic concerns of the leaders of the firm was directed towards enhancing mobility and adaptability.25 Its administrator-owners were appointed to the capital trading city ports in which the firm had established branches. Documentation from the years of the Russian-Turkish War (1877–8) and the Balkan War (1912–13) evidences enhanced mobility and quick decision making in order to avoid disastrous events, such as the closure of the Straits and their consequences on trade. Their main responses in order to reduce risk may be summarised as follows: a) Combination of import – export operations and diversification of products so as to reduce the dependence of the firm on one type of commercial activity, both in the Russian grain trade and Mediterranean products. b) Integration into shipping so as to expand operations and turnover and profit from both the rise of shipping rates and the intermediation profits. c) Combination of intermediation with brokerage services, especially in periods of crisis. The study of the Sifneo Frères archive and in particular of the commercial correspondence among the entrepreneurs has conveyed a wealth of information on the competitive advantage of family firms and their importance in transmitting intangible assets to their heirs. Family networks served as a pool of capital funding and human resources in acquiring important collaborators and building alliances. The family’s engagement in business served to reduce agency costs and expenses in order to monitor its management and the coordination of its branches. Mutual trust and a shared vision made its owners create long-run strategies and more often than not allowed them to overcome financial constraints or internal conflicts. ‘Familiness’, as a material and intellectual space in which family and the enterprise merged, resulted in mobilising a vast spectrum of resources and constructing a business culture that contributed to the firm’s success. 3

Concluding Remarks

The Black Sea and its inner sea, the Azov, were familiar regions to Greek seamen and merchants long before their opening to international navigation. Greeks were better adapted to the geographical and historical peculiarities of the area vis a vis other foreign entrepreneurs and combined their trading and seafaring skills in order to integrate South Russia’s economy into the world market. Their 25

Evrydiki Sifneos, ‘Mobility, Risk and Adaptability of the Diaspora Merchants: The Case of the SIFNEO FRÈRES Family Firm in Taganrog (Russia), Istanbul and Piraeus, 1850–1940’, The Historical Review 7 (2010), 239–52.

Beyond the Mediterranean

189

tools of trade, networks and form of organisation, their intangible assets such as the transmittance of trustworthy information though bonds of kinship and fellow-countrymen and their family-based structures enhanced growth in the region’s port cities. Future research will decide if this was a path-dependency pattern, taking into consideration the geographical proximity of the Black and Azov seas to the Eastern Mediterranean. Bibliography Aybak Tunc (ed.), Politics of the Black Sea: Dynamics of Cooperation and Conflict (London: IB Tauris, 2001). Braudel Fernand, La Méditerranée et le monde méditerranéen à l’époque de Philippe II (Paris: Armand Colin, 1949). D’Angelo Michela, Gelina Harlaftis and Carmel Vassalo (eds), Making Waves in the Mediterranean: Sulle onde del Mediterraneo, Proceedings of the 2nd Conference of the Mediterranean Maritime History Network, Messina and Taormina, 4–7 May 2006, Istituto di Studi Storici Gaetano Salvemini (Messina, 2010). Greaves Alan M., Miletus: A History (London: Routledge, 2002). Greaves Alan, ‘Milesians in the Black Sea: Trade, Settlement and Religion’ in http:// www.pontos.dk/publications/books/bss-6-files/bss6_01_greaves (last accessed 9 May 2013). Harlaftis Gelina, Creating Global Shipping. Aristotle Onassis, the Vagliano Brothers and the Business of Shipping c. 1820–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019). Harlaftis Gelina and Evrydiki Sifneos, Οι Έλληνες στην Αζοφική Θάλασσα, Οικονομική Ανάπτυξη, Εμπόριο και Ναυτιλία κατά τον 19ο αιώνα [Greeks in the Azov Sea, Economic Development, Trade and Shipping in the 19th Century] (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2015). Harlaftis Gelina and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων, 1700– 1821 [Greek Shipping, 1700–1821] (Athens: Kedros, 2013). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Ο ‘πολυεκατομμυριούχος κύριος Μαράκης’ Βαλλιάνος, το σκάνδαλο του Τελωνείου Ταγκανρόκ και οι 144 καταστροφές του Αντόν Τσέχωφ’ [The ‘Multi-millionaire Mr. Marakis Vagliano’, the Scandal of the Taganrog Customs Office and 144 Disasters of Anton Chekhov], Ta Istorika 54 (2011), 79–122. Harlaftis Gelina, ‘The “Eastern Invasion”: Greeks in the Mediterranean Trade and Shipping in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries’ in Maria Fusaro, Colin Heywood and Mohamed-Salah Omri (eds), Trade and Cultural Exchange in the Early Modern Mediterranean: Braudel’s Maritime Legacy (London: IB Tauris, 2010), 223–52. Harlaftis Gelina, ‘From Diaspora Traders to Shipping Tycoons: The Vagliano Bros.’, Business History Review 81/2 (Summer 2007), 237–68.

190

Sifneos

Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Mapping the Greek Maritime Diaspora from the Early Eighteenth to the Late Nineteenth Centuries’ in Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (Oxford and New York: Berg, 2005), 147–69. Harlaftis Gelina, A History of the Greek-owned Shipping, 19th–20th Centuries (London: Routledge, 1993). Hassiotis Ioannis K., Οι Έλληνες της Ρωσίας και της Σοβιετικής Ένωσης [The Greeks of Russia and the Soviet Union] (Salonica: University Studio Press, 1997). Herlihy Patricia, Odessa: A History (1797–1914) (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1986). Kardasis Vassilis, Diaspora Merchants in the Black Sea: The Greeks in Southern Russia, 1775–1861 (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2001). King Charles, The Black Sea: A History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). Lai Cheng-Chung, ‘Braudel’s Concepts and Methodology Reconsidered’, The European Legacy: Towards New Paradigms 5/1 (2000), 65–86. Manoli Panagiota, The Dynamics of Black Sea Subregionalism (London: Routledge, 2012). Mazis John A., The Greeks of Odessa: Diaspora Leadership in Late Imperial Russia (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004). Rieber Alfred J., Merchants and Entrepreneurs in Imperial Russia (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982). Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Greek Family Firms in the Azov Sea, 1850–1917’, Business History Review 87/2 (July 2013), 279–308. Sifneos Evrydiki and Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Entrepreneurship at the Russian Frontier of International Trade: The Greek Merchant Community/Paroikia of Taganrog in the Sea of Azov, 1780s–1830s’, in Viktor Zakharov, Gelina Harlaftis and Olga Katsiardi-Hering (eds), Merchant ‘Colonies’ in the Early Modern Period (15th–18th Centuries) (London: Chatto & Pickering, 2012). Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Diaspora Entrepreneurship Revisited: Greek Merchants and Firms in the Southern Russian Ports’, Entreprises et histoire 63/2 (2011), 40–52. Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Merchant Enterprises and Strategies in the Sea of Azov Ports’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/1 (June 2010), 259–68. Sifneos Evrydiki, ‘Mobility, Risk and Adaptability of the Diaspora Merchants: The Case of the SIFNEO FRÈRES Family Firm in Taganrog (Russia), Istanbul and Piraeus, 1850–1940’, The Historical Review 7 (2010), 239–52. Sifneos Evrydiki, Έλληνες έμποροι στην Αζοφική. Η δυναμική και τα όρια της οικογενειακής επιχείρησης [Greek Merchants in the Azov Sea: The Power and the Limits of a Family Business] (Athens: Institute of Modern Greek Research, 2009). Tsetskhladze Gocha R. (ed.), The Greek Colonization of the Black Sea Area: Historical Interpretation of Archaeology (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1998).

Chapter 9

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece in the Nineteenth Century Apostolos Delis The* advent of steam navigation in Greece is largely connected with the history of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (henceforth HSNC), the first to be founded in the Greek independent state, twenty-seven years after its constitution. The HSNC introduced two important innovations in Greece at the time: passenger shipping and modern shipbuilding and marine engineering. Despite the fact that French and Austrian steamers had already touched at Syros and Piraeus by the mid-1830s, most of the country’s insular and continental ports were connected via sailing ships. Therefore, the steamers of the HSNC, thanks to the regularity and speed of the service, brought structural changes to the daily pattern of domestic seaborne communications as well as to the living standards in multiple ways. The company’s steamers not only unified a fragmented geographical landscape and strengthened the presence of the state across the domestic territory, but also stimulated and facilitated transactions of all kinds and shortened the distances. Thus, they contributed crucially to the economic, social and cultural integration of the country. It is also important to point out that Greece in the nineteenth century was a latecomer to railway communications.1 In addition to this, the persisting phenomenon of brigandage contributed to the underdevelopment of land communications which, along with the plentitude of islands and coasts, made the sea the only viable, fast, safe and efficient method of domestic communication.2 In * This paper is performed within the framework of the project ‘Seafaring Lives in Transition, Mediterranean Maritime Labour and Shipping, 1850s–1920s (SeaLiT)’, which has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme (grant agreement No 714437). 1 Dionysis Paraskevopoulos, ‘Choosing Locomotives in the Formative Period of the Greek Railways, 1880–1910’ in Ian Inkster (ed.), History of Technology, vol. 33 (London: Bloomsbury, 2017), 47–80; Christina Agriantoni, ‘Η ελληνική οικονομία’ [Greek Economy] in Vassilis Panayotopoulos (ed.), Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού, 1770–2000 [History of Modern Hellenism, 1770–2000], vol. 5 (Athens: Ellinika Grammata, 2003), 55–70; Maria Synarellis, ‘Το οδικό δίκτυο’ [The Road Network] in Panayotopoulos (ed.), Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού, vol. 4, 119–30. 2 Ioannis Koliopoulos, Περί λύχνων αφάς: η ληστεία στην Ελλάδα (19ος αι.) [Brigandage in Greece in the 19th Century] (Thessaloniki: Vanias, 1994); Alexis Politis, ‘Brigandage  – excédents

© Apostolos Delis, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_010

192

Delis

fact, HSNC’s steamers, being the first and for a long period the only ones to connect the country, established passenger shipping as an undertaking of national scope and importance both in practice and in the minds of contemporaries. The Greek literature has so far focused on the administrative and financial aspects of HSNC history and has been attached to a limited range of sources: mostly the archive of the National Bank of Greece and newspapers from Syros and Piraeus.3 The wider international context of steam navigation of the period, in terms of technical problems and evolution, economic viability of steamship enterprises and other related issues was not taken into deep consideration. Furthermore, HSNC’s contribution to the modernisation of the country, in terms of technological innovation, improved communications and new patterns of material and cultural life, has been overlooked. Instead, despite its thirty-seven years of service, the literature has been biased against HSNC, presenting it as a failing entrepreneurial scheme due to the problematic relations between the state and the parasitic domestic capitalist elite. This approach is largely influenced by a wider theoretical framework in the Greek historiography of the 1980s which considered modern Greece a resource-deprived, backward economy that consistently failed to modernise.4 In fact, this analysis discouraged historians to search for the contribution and impact of HSNC on multiple aspects of national modernisation and daily life in Greece, especially since this period, from its foundation in 1857 up to its bankruptcy in 1893, coincides with the formative period of the technical evolution of the steamship and modern shipbuilding at a world level and the transition to the second industrial revolution. In this chapter, I shall focus on two aspects of HSNC’s contributions to the diffusion of technical innovation and national integration: the fleet and the communication lines, including a preliminary account of the foundation of the company. On the first aspect related to the company’s fleet, I will try to économiques  – élevage: Hypothèses pour une définition de l’interimbrication de ces éléments dans un circuit commun (XVIII–XIXe s.)’ in Maria Christina Chatziioannou and A. Tabaki (eds), Actes du IIe Colloque International d’Histoire. Economies Méditerranéennes. Equilibres et Intercommunications. XIIIe–XIXe siècles, Tome II (Athens: INR/NHRF, 1986), 155–70. 3 Konstantinos Papathanassopoulos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοΐας (1855–72). Τα αδιέξοδα του προστατευτισμού [Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1855–72): The Impasse of Protectionism] (Athens: Cultural Foundation of National Bank, 1988); Vasilis Kardasis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν. Ελληνική Εμπορική Ναυτιλία (1858–1914) [From Sail to Steam: Greek Merchant Marine (1858–1914)] (Athens: ΕΤΒΑ, 1993); Georgios Dertilis, Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Κράτους [History of the Greek State], vol. B (Athens: Estia, 2005), 787–94. 4 Georgios Dertilis, Banquiers, usuriers et paysans réseaux de crédit et stratégies du capital en Grèce, 1780–1930 (Paris: Fondation des Treilles, Éditions la Découverte, 1988).

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

193

demonstrate that the steamships purchased were in most cases in line with the advances of steam shipping and marine engineering technology. They were built by highly rated shipbuilding firms, and most of them were commercially successful long-lived vessels. In order to do that, I will examine the constructors of the steamers and their background, evolution, position and reputation in the shipbuilding market. Related to it, I will examine the technical characteristics of the vessels in comparison with the level of technical advancement of the period. The analysis of the fleet will be divided into two phases: the first group of new steamers entered in service between 1856–60 with an addition of two second-hand steamers in 1864. The second group of steamers were of the period 1881–7, when the fleet was renewed with second hand and new steamers in the face of competition by two new Greek steam navigation companies founded in the early 1880s. Last, but not least, the working life and the fate of the steamers will illustrate the performance of the investments made in those ships. In relation to the second aspect of HSNC’s contribution – that is, the communication lines – I will analyse the development and extension of the lines to show the introduction of passenger shipping in Greece as well as the integration of the national territory. These two developments are examined at the conjuncture of the political and military events of the nineteenth century. Then I will consider the strategies of the company struggling between profit and the obligations to the Greek Government to serve uneconomic lines under subsidy. In relation to this, I will check the profitability of each of the lines throughout the period. The analysis of a third very important aspect, that of HSNC’s arsenal in Syros, which introduced marine engineering in Greece, is currently under research and thus will not be included in this chapter. 1

The Challenges of the New Technology

The HSNC was founded on 3 January 1857, with its headquarters at Syros.5 The Greek state and the National Bank of Greece were the company’s main shareholders, holding 55% of its shares, and were followed by Greek diaspora entrepreneurs, who held 22%. The remaining shares belonged to domestic shareholders, with the highest percentage of 8.59% being held by those of

5 For the maritime centre of Syros, see Apostolos Delis, Mediterranean Wooden Shipbuilding: Economy, Technology and Institutions in the Nineteenth Century (Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2015), Chapter 1.

194

Delis

Syros.6 The foundation of the company was the result of long-term efforts of the Greek Government and private capitalists to establish a steam navigation enterprise of national interest. In 1837, two wooden steamers, Maximilianos and Othonas, were built in the Naval Arsenal of Poros and run by the postal services of Greece to provide postal and passenger services in a limited range of ports and only for a few days a month.7 In 1849, the director of the National Bank of Greece Georgios Stavros and the wealthy diaspora entrepreneur and Greek Ambassador in Alexandria of Egypt Michail Tositsas made a first attempt to institute a steam navigation company named Societe de Navigation a Vapeur Grecque et pour la Canalisation du Detroit de l’ Eubee. However, this effort failed three years later due to the competition with Austrian Lloyd for the assignment of the postal concession by the Greek Government.8 In 1853, another group of capitalists, this time mainly from Patras, (the main export port for currants, one of the Greek economy’s dominant staples in the nineteenth century) with the collaboration of Greek entrepreneurs based in the United Kingdom, sought to purchase steamers, once again unsuccessfully.9 Finally, in 1855, prior to the constitution of a company, the Greek Parliament passed a bill for the purchase of steamers, financed by the National Bank of Greece and commissioned to the same group of UK-based entrepreneurs that were entrusted by the merchants of Patras a few years earlier.10 This time the effort succeeded and three new steamers were ordered in UK shipyards on the account of the National Bank of Greece. Two of them, Βασίλισσα της Ελλάδος (Queen of Greece) and Ύδρα (Hydra) arrived in 1856 and began service in August under the General Direction of the post offices of Greece, since the company

6 7

8 9 10

Papathanassopoulos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής, 56. Konstantinos Papathanassopoulos, Ελληνική εμπορική ναυτιλία (1833–1856). Εξέλιξη και αναπροσαρμογή. [Greek Merchant Marine, (1833–1856): Development and Readjustment] (Athens: Cultural Foundation of National Bank, 1983), 100–101; Maria Panopoulou, Οικονομικά και τεχνικά προβλήματα στην ελληνική ναυπηγική βιομηχανία 1850–1914 [Economic and Technical Problems in the Greek Shipbuilding Industry 1850–1914] (Athens: KEPE, 1993), 202–3. Papathanassopoulos, Ελληνική εμπορική, 152–3. Papathanassopoulos, Ελληνική εμπορική, 204–11. Papathanassopoulos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής, 26, 35; Ελληνική Ατμοπλοΐα, Προκαταρτικά Β. Διατάγματα [Hellenic Steam Navigation Company, Preliminary Royal Decrees and Statute] (Hermoupolis, 1857), 47; Ιστορικό Αρχείο Εθνικής Τραπέζης Ελλάδος [Historical Archive of the National Bank of Greece], ΧΧV ΕΡΓΑ, Α’ Ναυτιλιακά, φάκελος 32, υποφάκελος 4, 1856–72.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

195

was not constituted yet.11 Meanwhile, a fierce competition over the location of the imminent steam navigation company’s headquarters had already begun between the capitalist elites of Patras, Syros and, to a lesser extent, Piraeus. Syros prevailed due to its position as an international commercial and maritime crossroads in the Eastern Mediterranean, but also due to the National Bank of Greece’s strategy to penetrate this very important market, where the merchant class was traditionally hostile to the Bank.12 For Greece, as well as many other parts of the world of the mid-nineteenth century, the establishment of a steamship company was an utterly novel undertaking. In the United Kingdom the most advanced case, in the 1820s steamships already connected a large part of the national territory, as well as foreign ports in the North Sea. In the 1830s, British steamers had established lines in the Mediterranean and in the 1840s they expanded to the Atlantic Ocean.13 In the Mediterranean, from 1837 to the foundation of the HSNC, Austrian Lloyd provided the only long-distance services in the Adriatic and Eastern Mediterranean and French steamers all along the Mediterranean. These latter were initially operated under the jurisdiction of the Post Office, after 1845 by the company Rostand and from 1851 onwards by the Messageries Maritimes.14 Nevertheless, most of the cargo shipping, as well as the communications in the European waters and beyond, was carried out by sailing ships. Therefore, when HSNC was created, its board of directors had to build everything from scratch, without previous know-how. To that point, the existing level of expertise in maritime business, ship operation and technical issues was related to the sailing ship. The purchase, operation and maintenance of a fleet of steamships required utterly new methods and market knowledge. The capital requirements were high and necessitated the pull of funds and the formation of a joint-stock company. This in its turn demanded a different method of business organisation compared to the management of the sailing ship which, with one or a few owners at the most, was the only known form of shipping management in Greece up to that time.

11 12 13 14

Κανονισμός της Υπηρεσίας των Ελληνικών Ατμοπλοίων [Regulation of the Greek Steamers’ Service] (Athens, 1856), 1. Newspaper Αίολος no. 623, 11 August 1856, 3 and no. 620, 28 July 1856, published in Papathanassopoulos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής, 212–14. Kardasis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν, 27–30. John Armstrong and David M. Williams, The Impact of Technological Change: The Early Steamship in Britain, Research in Maritime History, no. 47 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2011), 23–24, 66, 151–2, 155. Marie-Françoise Berneron-Couvenhes, Les Messageries Maritimes. L’essor d’une grande compagnie de navigation française 1851–1894 (Paris: Presses Paris Sorbonne, 2007), 41–101.

196

Delis

Moreover, the steamship, despite its independence from the wind, needed supplies of coal, and the creation of the coaling stations in the connecting ports was a sine qua non condition in a country that, with the exception of Syros and Piraeus which had coaling stations for foreign steamers, simply lacked this infrastructure. In addition, steamships needed constant cleaning and repairs to the hull, engine and boilers. Therefore, the need to establish a technical base for the maintenance of a fleet of steamers was another necessary infrastructure. Here, things were even harder than in the case of the coaling stations. Marine engineering was almost an unknown craft among the Greeks at that time; the fixed infrastructure of the arsenal had to be planned from the very beginning and the qualified personnel for the arsenal and for the service on board the steamers had to be recruited from abroad. Finally, the network of agents in the ports had to be organised by hiring capable and trusted persons to represent the interests of the company and coordinate the traffic of people, mail and cargo. Therefore, the board of directors had to organise all these issues without any previous knowledge and without any assistance by the companies of Austrian Lloyd and Messageries Maritimes, who refused to provide them with any useful hint or information.15 The most crucial issue for the board of directors in the making of the company was the purchase of steamers. Since no previous experience and know-how on building steamships existed in the Greek Κingdom, they had to purchase them from abroad. In this case, the network of Greek entrepreneurs based in the United Kingdom was crucial in mediating for the search, order and supervision of the construction of the new steamers in UK shipyards. The choice of the United Kingdom was an obvious one, since the country was the biggest shipbuilding market and the most advanced in iron shipbuilding and marine engineering technology. Between 1856 and 1875, 24% of steam tonnage produced in UK shipyards was built for foreign flags. In the last two decades before World War II, UK shipyards built 60%–80% of world production, out of which 25%–30% was for foreign flags.16 The committee in charge of the purchase of the first two Greek steamers in 1855 included the London-based entrepreneurs

15 16

Berneron-Couvenhes, Les Messageries Maritimes, 161; ΙΑΕΤΕ [Historical Archive of the National Bank of Greece], ΧΧV ΕΡΓΑ, Α΄ Ναυτιλιακά, φάκελος 32, υποφάκελος 4, Δ.Σ [HSNC to the Board of the National Bank of Greece, 11 January 1858]. Anthony Slaven, ‘The Shipbuilding Industry’ in Roy Church (ed.), The Dynamics of Victorian Business (London: Routledge, 1980), 124; Simon Ville, ‘Introduction’ in Simon Ville (ed.), Shipbuilding in the United Kingdom in the 19th Century: A Regional Approach (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 1993), vii.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

197

A. Ionidis, St. Zizinias and Spyros Mavroyannis.17 In 1857, the committee for the construction of two more steamers comprising the Liverpool-based shipping firm Papayannis & Mousabinis and the merchant Stefanos Frangiadis, as well as the Manchester-based merchants Skarlatos M. Mavrocordatos and G.K. Tziros.18 The firm of Papayannis, owner of an important fleet of cargo steamers in the United Kingdom, had a particularly crucial role as an intermediate in market information, order and purchase of steamers, from the 1850s to the 1880s, for the HSNC as well as for other Greek shipowners.19 Therefore, this network of UK-based Greek entrepreneurs, also heavily involved in shipping, played a pivotal role in linking the HSNC members to the world of UK shipbuilding and marine engineering and their gradual integration into this international circuit of building, marketing and transfer of knowledge from ‘the workshop of the world’ to more peripheral economies. 2

The Level of Technology of the Steamship in the 1850s

The 1850s, the period of the foundation of the HSNC and of the constitution of the first steam shipping fleet in Greece, was very crucial in the development of steamship technology and marine engineering, with long-lasting effects. It was precisely a period in which the steamship was in a phase of technical transition and improvements that led it to become a viable solution in the transport of passenger and cargo from then onwards. Several technical factors affected the viability of steamships up to the third quarter of the nineteenth century. The main axis of discussion and experiment (mainly in the United Kingdom) for the improvement of the steamship evolved around specific and interrelated technical issues. More specifically: a) the poor performance of steam engines in terms of power efficiency and consumption; b) the paddle wheel or the screw propeller as more suitable means of propulsion; and c) the use of wood or iron as a more suitable material for the construction of the hull. The size and weight of the early steam engines and the great amount of coal required for consumption, which accounted for a large part of the carrying capacity of the steamers, raised the operation costs and therefore reduced the relative profitability of the steamship as a cargo carrier. Up to the 1850s, despite 17 18 19

Papathanassopoulos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής, 26, 35; ΙΑΕΤΕ, ΧΧV ΕΡΓΑ, Α΄ Ναυτιλιακά, φάκελος 32, υποφάκελος 6, 1855–9. ΙΑΕΤΕ, ΧΧV ΕΡΓΑ, Α΄ Ναυτιλιακά, φάκελος 32, υποφάκελος 6, 1855–9. Gelina Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping: The Making of an International Tramp Fleet, 1830 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 1996), 67.

198

Delis

some small improvements in engines and boilers, marine steam engines operated at low pressures due to problems in the construction of boilers. The quality of copper and wrought iron used for the fabrication of boilers was not standardised and the risk of explosion compulsorily kept steam pressures low, thus preventing more efficient and economic use of steam, which demanded high pressures.20 The efficiency and economy of marine steam engines greatly improved after the invention of the compound engine in 1853 by the Clyde engineers John Elder and Charles Randolph, which reduced the consumption of coal by approximately 30%. However, the advantages of the compound engine were truly exploited after the invention of the ‘Scotch’ boiler by Glasgow engineer James Howden in 1862. This was a type of cylindrical boiler able to develop high pressures of 40 psi and beyond, which optimised the use of the compound engine in terms of economy and spread its use to three quarters of the UK steamers by 1875.21 Initially, the compound engine was widely adopted by companies like the Pacific Steam Navigation Company or the Peninsular and Oriental Company, which operated on longer routes and were eager to economise on the fuel consumed on board and on the expenses of supplying distant coaling stations. On the other hand, operators on shorter routes like the North Atlantic, with cheaper coal supplies, were slower to appreciate the advantages of that innovation.22 Also related to marine engine efficiency was the issue of the means of propulsion. The first form of propulsion in steamships was the paddle wheel, which was quite dominant up until the early 1850s. From then onwards, the screw propeller gradually gained ground. By the late 1850s, twenty-three out of the thirty-two UK steamers and all eight German steamers of the North Atlantic service were screw-driven. In 1854, twenty out of the Peninsular and Oriental Company’s forty-five steamers were iron screw-driven vessels (44.4%), whereas this percentage increased in 1859 to 67.24% and in 1861 to 70.83%. In 20

21

22

Denis Griffiths, ‘Marine Engineering Development in the Nineteenth Century’ in Robert Gardiner (ed.), The Advent of Steam: The Merchant Steamship Before 1900 (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1993), 164; in the same volume, David J. Starkey, ‘The Industrial Background of the Development of Steam’, 133; Anthony Slaven, ‘The Shipbuilding Industry’ in Roy Church (ed.), The Dynamics of Victorian Business, 110–11; Anthony Slaven, ‘Modern British Shipbuilding, 1800–1990’ in L.A. Ritchie (ed.), The Shipbuilding Industry: A Guide to Historical Records (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992), 2–3. Anthony Slaven, British Shipbuilding, 1500–2010 (Lancaster: Crucible Books, 2013), 111; Ritchie, The Shipbuilding Industry, 3; Starkey, ‘The Industrial Background’, 133; Slaven, ‘Shipbuilding in Nineteenth-century Scotland’ in Simon Ville (ed.), Shipbuilding in the United Kingdom in the Nineteenth Century: A Regional Approach (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1992), 169–70; The Engineer, 5 November 1858, 348, 11 February 1859, 111. Griffiths, ‘Marine Engineering’, 169–71.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

199

that latter year, the Cunard, engaged in the North Atlantic service, had eighteen screw-driven and fifteen paddle-wheeled vessels, most of the latter built before 1855.23 In the Mediterranean, the fleet of the Messageries Maritimes in 1851 was mainly composed of wooden paddle-wheeled steamers. In the period 1854–7, they upgraded their fleet by building thirty-three new steamers in the United Kingdom, fourteen of them iron screw-driven. The iron-hulled vessels superseded the wooden ones in 1854 and the screw-driven superseded the paddle-wheeled ones ten years later. Similarly, Austrian Lloyd in the period 1852–67, and with particular emphasis on the years 1853–8, upgraded its fleet considerably with iron screw-driven vessels built in UK shipyards.24 The advantages the screw presented vis a vis the paddle were: a) that it worked efficiently in parallel with the sails (which were necessary as auxiliary power in the steamships) – on the contrary, the paddle wheels were overburdened with the working of heavy canvas and therefore were lightly rigged; b) a screw-driven engine was lighter than a paddle-driven one, and could be placed below the waterline, thus saving much more space overall for carrying capacity otherwise occupied in the beam of paddle-engine-driven vessels; c) despite the considerable speed and performance of the paddle-wheeled vessels in calm waters, in rough seas they suffered from unequal immersion, which could prove dangerous when one paddle was deeply immersed and the other was almost rolling in the air. In addition to that, the variable immersion due to the lowering of the draught after coal consumption or discharge of cargo resulted in inefficient use of paddles. Screw-driven vessels also presented certain disadvantages, like the vibrating motion, very annoying to passengers, or the greater wear and tear of the engines, as they required higher revolutions per minute than the paddle-wheeled engines. Overall, however, screw was more advantageous in a greater variety of sea and weather conditions and, in combination with the improvement of the engines and boilers, was a more suitable means of propulsion for long-distance seagoing steamers.25 23 24 25

The Engineer, 27 May 1859, 371, 24 June 1859, 438, 6 December 1861, 345, 28 June 1861, 39. Berneron-Couvenhes, Les Messageries Maritimes, 180–90, 790–2; Annuario Maritimo per l’anno 1873, XXIII Annata, Trieste, 1873, LXVI–LXIX. The Engineer, 7 October 1859, 265–6, 27 May 1859, 371–2, 1 April 1859, 228, 20 January 1860, 45–46; Andrew Murray, Robert Murray and Augustin F.B. Creuze, Ship-building in Iron and Wood (Edinburgh: A. and C. Black, 1863), 139; Basil Greenhill, ‘Steam Before the Screw’ in Robert Gardiner (ed.), The Advent of Steam, 16–17; ECB Corlett, ‘The Screw Propeller and Merchant Shipping 1840–1865’ in Robert Gardiner (ed.), The Advent of Steam, 85, 96; André Ortolan, Traité élémentaire des machines à vapeur marines rédigé d’après le programme du concours pour le brevet de capitaine au long cours et de maitre au cabotage, Troisième Édition (Paris: n.p., 1859), 102, 161–4.

200

Delis

The use of wood or iron in the construction of the hull decisively affected the performance of the vessel in combination with the engine and the means of propulsion. A wooden hull composed of numerous pieces was considered a less coherent and more flexible structure, which over the years tended to weaken and to disintegrate. The iron, on the other hand, was stronger, more durable, safer and more resistant, especially in the case of collision, when wooden hulls could face disasters; more malleable, which enabled the construction of far greater sizes of hull without weakening the coherence of the structure; lighter than wood, which saved a bigger space for stowage; and had lower construction and repair costs. Generally wooden hulls were not well suited for steamships, but the combination of wooden hull and screw propeller was the worst possible. This was mainly due to the vibration of the screw, which slackened the timbers and the oversized sternpost and rudder, which in turn affected the efficient performance of the propeller.26 However, the iron at the early stages also faced several problems. First its price, which did not become more competitive than timber prices before 1850s; then, the working skills required to produce or repair iron, which were less widespread than for timber. Moreover, the uneven quality of the material and the fouling of the bottom of the hull, which required regular cleaning, and the compass deviation were among the major disadvantages.27 Also, the British Admiralty considered the iron unsuitable for war vessels and did not approve it as a material for the hull of the subsidised steamers (like the Royal Mail Steam Packet Co) which carried the Royal Mail abroad, up to 1853. Later on, the establishment of the rules of classification for iron vessels by the Lloyd’s Register in 1854, which coincided with the ultimate development of the paddle steamer, established iron as the standard construction material for steamers until the 1880s, when it was gradually replaced by steel.28 In 1850 the iron vessels accounted for 9.5% of the UK output, whereas the percentage of iron vessels among the steamers was 61%. Ten years later, no wooden steamers were built and one third of the total capacity of UK sailing ships were

26

27 28

Simon Ville, ‘The Transition to Iron and Steel Construction’ in Robert Gardiner (ed.), Sail’s Last Century: The Merchant Sailing Ship, 1830–1930 (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1995), 53; Slaven, ‘The Shipbuilding Industry’, 112; Greenhill, ‘Steam Before the Screw’, 21–22; The Engineer, 4 November 1859, 328, 335, 7 October 1859, 266, 27 May 1859, 371, 28 June 1861, 393. Greenhill, ‘Steam Before the Screw’, 22; Ville, ‘The Transition to Iron’, 53, 68. Greenhill, ‘Steam Before the Screw’, 21, 26; Ville, ‘The Transition to Iron’, 62.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

201

iron-built.29 Already by the end of the 1850s the replacement of wood and sail by iron and steam was anticipated.30 3

The First Group of Steamers and Its Constructors

The first fleet of HSNC, bought entirely new from UK shipyards in the years 1856–60, composed of eight out of nine iron-hulled and seven out of nine screw-driven steamers, followed the cutting edge of the technology of the period. Five were built in Clyde, two in the North East and two on the Thames (see Appendix 9.2). The first three that operated in the first year of service (1857) were the Queen of Greece, Hydra and Panellinion. The Queen of Greece was built in Monkwearmourth, Sunderland by William Pile and Co. William Pile (1822–73) was one of the most renowned shipbuilders of his time. Born and raised in a shipbuilding family, he proved very quickly to be a talented and ingenious shipwright and ran his own business from 1848 until his death. The yard was the biggest on the River Wear, with eight building slips and up to 2,000 employees. From 1861, he also started to build iron and composite hulls for sailing ships and steamships alike.31 He also introduced clipper-built hulls, of which his most famous ship, which still survives, is the 1864 built City of Adelaide (696 tonnes).32 Hydra was built by Blackwood & Gordon, which was founded in 1852 initially as a marine engineering firm that soon switched to shipbuilding, based at Paisley, on White Cart Water, a tributary of the River Clyde. Hydra was built at yard no. 16 from the thirty-three iron steamers built at Paisley.33 From 1860, the firm moved to Port Glasgow in order to have more space to be able to build bigger ships, and here 204 vessels were built. The firm, despite a short-term closure for insolvency between 1887 to 1889, lasted until 1900, when it was bought by Clyde Shipbuilding and Engineering Co.34 29 30 31 32 33 34

Slaven, ‘The Shipbuilding Industry’, 111. The Engineer, 15 October 1858, 297. David R. MacGregor, Merchant Sailing Ships, 1850–75: Heyday of Sail (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1984), 157; Fred M. Walker, Ships and Shipbuilders: Pioneers of Design and Construction (Barnsley: Seaforth Publishing, 2010), 120–2. https://www.cityofadelaide.org.au/ (last accessed 6 November 2018). https://www.miramarshipindex.nz/ship/5612599; https://www.clydeships.co.uk/view .php?year_built=&builder=&ref=2275&vessel=HYDRA visit on 6 November 2018. Ritchie, The Shipbuilding Industry, 50–51; Fred M. Walker, Song of the Clyde: A History of Clyde Shipbuilding (Sparkford: Patrick Stephens Limited, 1984), 57–58, 75; John Parkhill, The History of Paisley (Paisley: R. Stewart, 1857), 100.

202

Delis

The third steamer, Panellinion, was also built in Clyde by the firm James Henderson and Son, already based at Renfrew in 1847. From 1850 to 1861 the firm built twenty-one screw-driven steamers, nineteen paddle-wheeled and two sailing ships, all iron-hulled. From 1861 to 1874 it was renamed to Henderson, Coulborn and Co, and built seventy-six screw-driven steamers, nineteen paddle-wheeled and three sailing ships.35 Then it was renamed to Lobnitz, Coulborn and Co after Henry C. Lobnitz, a Danish engineer, joined the firm in 1857 and was promoted to senior staff. The Renfrew shipyard survived up to 1964.36 Panellinion was the sixteenth yard of the firm, followed by Aphroessa, an iron screw steamer, ordered by the Greek Government for the navy. Aphroessa, along with Nauplion/Sphendone, another iron screw steamer built at almost the same time for the same purpose at Port Glasgow by John Reid & Co, replaced Hydra and the Queen of Greece for a short period in 1857, while they were under repair in the Nafplio naval dockyards.37 The continuous operation of the first three steamers and the need for repairs and cleaning caused disorder and interruptions in the service. The Board of Directors immediately needed two more steamers ready for service. However, the UK-based Greek committee strongly disfavoured the idea of purchasing ready steamers. Despite that, the Board of Directors, while under pressure, sought ready solutions in the United Kingdom and Istanbul, but in vain. In February 1858 the UK-based Greek committee ordered two steamers, one to John Reid & Co and the other to J & G Thomson, and asked for an advance instalment of £5,625 for the agreement with the constructors, with an expected delivery by August 1858 at a total cost of £13,250 each.38 The steamers, both delivered in 1858, were the Omonoia and Karteria. Omonoia was launched on 28 June 1858 in one of the yards operated by John Reid & Co in Port Glasgow, with an oscillating engine of 120 hp, built by Blackwood & 35

36 37

38

http://clydeships.co.uk/list.php?vessel=&official_number=&imo=&builder=134&builder _eng=&year_built=&launch_after=&launch_before=&role=&propulsion=&category =&owner=&port=&flag=&disposal=&lost; http://clydeships.co.uk/list.php?vessel=&offi cial_number=&imo=&builder=133&builder_eng=&year_built=&launch_after=&launch _before=&role=&propulsion=&category=&owner=&port=&flag=&disposal=&lost (last accessed 6 November 2018). Ritchie, The Shipbuilding Industry, 110–11; Walker, Song of the Clyde, 80–81. http://clydeships.co.uk/view.php?official_number=&imo=&builder=&builder_eng=& year_built=&launch_after=&launch_before=&role=&propulsion=&category=& owner=&port=&flag=&disposal=&lost=&ref=19052&vessel=NAUPLION (last accessed 6 November 2018); Papathanassopoulos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής, 78–79. ΙΑΕΤΕ, ΧΧV ΕΡΓΑ, Α΄ Ναυτιλιακά, φάκελος 32, υποφάκελος 6, 1855–9, Διεύθυνσις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοΐας αρ. 775, 17 Φεβρουαρίου 1858; Γενική Συνέλευσις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοϊας, Συγκροτηθείσα εν Ερμουπόλει τη 30 και 31 Μαρτίου 1858, 5.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

203

Gordon and registered as the property of Papayannis of Liverpool. John Reid, initially an anchor, chain and block maker, went into partnership with John Wood, a builder of clippers and of the Comet (the first commercially successful steamer) between 1838 and 1857.39 The firm acquired worldwide reputation, and between 1844 and 1891, when John Reid retired, had built 228 iron and steel sailing ships and steamers. Among them, John Reid & Co built four iron-hulled screw-driven steamers for the Greek Navy between 1856 and 1858: Nauplion, Plexavra, Panope and Salaminia.40 Karteria was built by James and George Thomson, a firm established in 1847 at Finnieston Street, Glasgow, initially as an engine and boiler workshop. Both James and George had previously worked in Robert Napier’s works, the most important and innovative shipbuilding and marine engineering firm in Clyde, in the first half of the nineteenth century.41 In 1850 or 1851 they moved to Govan, where they established a shipyard including engineering, boiler and foundry works, where up to 1,700 workers were employed. Twenty years later, they moved to a new area of approximately fifty acres with large and modern facilities, which allowed space for 3,000 to 4,000 employees and the undertaking of very large projects of building and the launch of merchant and navy vessels. From the very beginning, the firm had built a reputation for innovative and high-quality works, and among its very important and faithful clients was the passenger company Cunard Line.42 When sold to John Brown & Co Ltd of Sheffield in 1899 for £923,255, it was among the biggest shipbuilding and marine engineering enterprises in Clyde.43 Karteria was launched in August 1858 in Cessnock Bank, Govan, as yard no. 39, with a 120 hp engine built

39

40

41 42

43

The Engineer, 1 September 1893, 225; William Forrest Macarthur, History of Port Glasgow (Glasgow: Jackson, Wylie & Co, 1932), 114. Shipbuilding & Shipping Record: A Journal of Shipbuilding, Marine Engineering, Dock, Harbours & Shipping 67 (1946), 712–14. http:// www.gracesguide.co.uk/John_Reid_and_Co#cite_ref-1 (last accessed 7 November 2018). http://clydeships.co.uk/list.php?vessel=&official_number=&imo=&builder=240 &builder_eng=&year_built=&launch_after=&launch_before=&role=&propulsion=& category=&owner=&port=&flag=&disposal=&lost= (last accessed 7 November 2018); Πανδώρα [Pandora], 7, 166, 1857, 518–20. Crosbie Smith, Coal, Steam and Ships: Engineering, Enterprise and Empire on the Nineteenth-Century Seas (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018), 33–51. Slaven, ‘Shipbuilding in the Nineteenth Century’, 169, 173, 175; Walker, Song of the Clyde, 146–8; http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/J._and_G._Thomson (last accessed 12 November 2018); H.B. Peebles, ‘A Study in Failure: J. & G. Thomson and Shipbuilding at Clydebank, 1871–1890’, Scottish Historical Review 69 (1990), 22–48. Slaven, ‘Shipbuilding in the Nineteenth Century’, 175; The Engineer, 18 January 1889, 47.

204

Delis

in the workshop of Finnieston Street, in the same yard where Papayannis had built five of his steamers in the same period.44 In September 1858, Omonoia and Karteria went into the service and HSNC expanded its lines abroad to Crete and Thessaloniki, and in May 1859 it expanded further to Constantinople and Trieste.45 Soon, the company needed more steamers and Konstantinos Volanakis, member of the board of directors, sought ready solutions in UK shipyards. The option of purchasing the second-hand wooden paddle-wheeled steamers offered by Austrian Lloyd was not considered a convenient one.46 In 1860, four new steamers were added to HSNC’s fleet: Otho, Amalia, Eptanisos and Byzantion. Otho and Amalia were iron-hulled, paddle-wheeled steamers built by Charles Lungley and Co in Deptford Green Dockyard on the Thames and launched between March and May 1860.47 Charles Lungley was an ingenious and innovative shipbuilder who initially settled in Poplar and Rotherhithe and from 1852 to 1864 took over the Deptford Green yard, after which he became Managing Director of the Millwall Ironworks and Shipbuilding Co. He designed the rudder of the Great Eastern and patented many inventions. Among the most famous was the ‘unsinkable ship’ or ‘Lungley Trunks’, where he divided the hull into different airtight and watertight compartments and thus in case of flood or fire the damage was isolated and did not spread to the entire vessel.48 Even Otho became a kind of experiment, since she was not launched into the Thames, but into a floating dock 400 feet long, on the head of which she was constructed.49 The last two vessels of this generation of the HSNC fleet, Eptanisos and Byzantion, were built in the North East and Clyde, respectively. Pile, Spence and 44 45 46 47 48

49

http://clydeships.co.uk/view.php?year_built=&builder=306&a1Page=4&ref=22226&ves sel=KAPTEPIA, and http://clydeships.co.uk/list.php?vessel=&year_built=&builder=306 &a1Page=1 (last accessed 12 November 2018). Papathanassopoulos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής, 80. ΙΑΕΤΕ, ΧΧV ΕΡΓΑ, Α΄ Ναυτιλιακά, φάκελος 32, υποφάκελος 6, 1855–9, Διεύθυνσις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοΐας, αρ. 2425 14 June 1859, αρ. 2470 and 2496, 21 June 1859. Tony Arnold, Iron Shipbuilding on the Thames, 1832–1915: An Economic and Business History (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), 46, 101; Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, Monday 15 May 1871. Arnold, Iron Shipbuilding, 101; The Queensland Times, Ipswich Herald and General Advertiser, 3 January 1862, 4; The Artisan, 1 November 1861, 264; The Year-book of Facts in Science and Art (London: Lockwood & Co, 1862), 48; The Mechanics’ Magazine and Journal of Engineering, Agricultural Machinery, Manufactures and Shipbuilding, vol. 75, 25 October 1861, 281; John Hollingshead, The Illustrated Catalogue of the International Exhibition, British Division, Volume II (London: n.p., 1862), Class XII, 2; P. Barry, The Dockyards and the Private Shipyards of the Kingdom (London: Sampson Low, 1863), 30, 63; The Engineer, 1 May 1863, 243. The Engineer, 16 March 1860, 165.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

205

Co in West Hartlepool built Eptanisos. John Pile was the brother of William Pile, the shipbuilder of the Queen of Greece, who upon invitation by the founder of the port of West Hartlepool, Ralph Ward Jackson, established a shipyard in 1852. In 1854, he founded an ironworks firm, West Hartlepool Rolling Mills Co, to supply iron plates for ships.50 Up to 1859, he built twenty-three vessels, among them some for Greek UK-based firms like M. Spartalis and Co (Demetrius 1856, Christina 1857) and Stefanos Xenos (Bobolina, Marcos Botsaris, Admiral Miaoulis 1858, Botassis, Tzamados 1859).51 In 1859, he went into partnership with another shipbuilder, Joseph Spence, creating Pile, Spence and Co, which in 1861 employed up to 1,500 workers, and built fifty-eight vessels up to 1867. Pile, Spence and Co, despite its entrepreneurial success and vigour, dissolved in 1866 due to the bankruptcy of the bank Overend, Gurney & Company, to whom it had entrusted its portfolios.52 Among the victims were other shipping firms like the Greek and Oriental Steamship Company of Stefanos Xenos.53 Pile, Spence and Co, having two shipyards, built Eptanissos in the south yard at Swanson Dock as yard no. 28, one of the two shipyards under its ownership. Eptanissos had a compound two-cylinder engine of 125 hp built by the engine makers Fossick & Hackworth from Stockton on Tees and initially registered as property of the Greek and Oriental Steamship Company of Stefanos Xenos. The vessel was launched on 10 March 1860, completed in April and in May was 50

51 52

53

http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/John_Pile_and_Co, (last accessed 13 November 2018); Transactions – North East Coast Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders, 107, 1991, 103; OBITUARY. RALPH WARD JACKSON, 1806–1880. Minutes of the Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers 63 (1881), 328–32. http://www.teesbuiltships.co.uk/list.php?vessel=&year_built=&builder=5020 (last accessed 13 November 2018). In January 1864 the firm became a limited liability company including a shipyard, dry docks, the ironworks West Hartlepool Iron and Co, blast furnaces, the Stockton Ropery and Co and the West Hartlepool Steam Navigation Co with the fleet of nine steamers connecting West Hartlepool with Hamburg, Stettin, Rotterdam and St Petersburg. https:// gracesguide.co.uk/Pile,_Spence_and_Co; http://www.teesbuiltships.co.uk/list.php?vessel =&year_built=&builder=5022&a1Page=6 (last accessed 14 November 2018); Thomas Richmond, The Local Records of Stockton and the Neighbourhood, or, a register of memorable events, chronologically arranged, which have occurred in and near Stockton and the north-eastern parts of Cleveland (Stockton-London: n.p., 1868), 272–73; MacGregor, Merchant Sailing Ships, 1850–75, 157. Shipbuilding and Shipping Record, vol. 79 (1952), 786; The Economist, 1867, 50; Ashraf A. Mahate, ‘Contagion Effects of Three Late Nineteenth Century British Bank Failures’, Business and Economic History 23/1, 1994, 102–15; Marc Flandreau and Stefano Ugolini, ‘Where It All Began: Lending of Last Resort and the Bank of England during the Overend-Gurney panic of 1866’, Working paper, Norges Bank, 03, 2011; Stefanos Xenos, Depredations: Or, Overend, Gurney, & Co., and the Greek & Oriental Steam Navigation Company (London: The Author, 1869).

206

Delis

tested against one of the fastest screw-driven steam-powered boats, the Pilot, with excellent results. She sailed from West Hartlepool to Syros in sixteen days, with stops in Gibraltar and Malta, arriving on 5 July 1860; she was able to reach a speed of 14 miles/hour in calm weather.54 Byzantion was built by the firm of J.G. Lawrie in the Park SB Yard, Whiteinch, Glasgow. J.G. Lawrie was a student of the University of Glasgow, who began by acquiring a yard in Clydeholme, Whiteinch in 1854 and began the manufacture of marine engines in 1857. Up to 1875, the firm built fifty-three vessels, mostly screw-driven steamers and some iron sailing ships. J.G. Lawrie was president of the Institution of Scottish Engineers and of the Association of Scottish Shipbuilders, published numerous essays on technical issues of shipbuilding and marine engineering, and became the first Lecturer of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering at the University of Glasgow.55 Byzantion was launched on 21 April 1860 in the presence of the member of the board of directors of HSNC, Konstantinos Volanakis, and received very positive comments for her qualities in terms of construction and speed.56 In 1864, two more second-hand steamers were bought from the Greek Government to serve the new lines in the Ionian Islands that were annexed in the Greek kingdom in that same year.57 The steamers, Athinai (ex Otho), 510 tonnes and 150 hp, and Ionia (ex Agios Petros), 230 tonnes and 120 hp, were both wooden paddle driven. Athinai was built in 1837, at the Poros Naval Arsenal under the supervision of the shipbuilder Georgios Tobazis. Her engine was made by Maudslay, Sons & Field and could reach up to nine miles per hour.58 The Ionia was built in 1836 by Fletcher, Son and Fearnall, Limehouse, 54

55

56 57 58

http://www.teesbuiltships.co.uk/view.php?year_built=&builder=5022&a1Page=1 &ref=169001&vessel=EPTANISSOS; https://gracesguide.co.uk/Pile,_Spence_and_Co (last accessed 14 November 2018); The Engineer, 18 May 1860, 328; Newspaper Πειραιεύς [Piraeus] no. 19, 5 July 1860, 3 and no. 21, 12 July 1860, 2. https://www.clydeships.co.uk/list.php?vessel=&year_built=&builder=153&a1Page=1 https://www.clydeships.co.uk/view.php?year_built=&builder=153&a1Page=2 &ref=10721&vessel=BYZANTION (last accessed 14 November 2018); Ritchie, The Shipbuilding Industry, 47; Walker, Song of the Clyde, 44, 159, 165; Transactions of the Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders in Scotland, vol. 9, 1866, 1–17; Transactions of the Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders in Scotland, vol. 1, 1858, 62–67, 105–16, 125–32; The Engineer, 3 and 10 September 1858, 15 August 1862, 90–91, 2 September 1864, 143. Πειραιεύς [Piraeus], no. 3, 10 May 1860, 3. Elias Kehayias and Alex Domestinis, Υπόμνημα Συνοπτικόν της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοΐας [Memorandum of the Hellenic Steam Navigation] (Athens: n.p., 1869), 30. Panopoulou, Οικονομικά και τεχνικά προβλήματα [Economic and Technical Problems], 203; http://www.hellasarmy.gr/hn_tech.php?id=OTHON-STSHIP&table=1 (last accessed 4 February 2019).

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

207

London, one of the oldest shipbuilding firms on the Thames, and was operating the service in the Ionian Islands under British protection.59 4

The Second Group of Steamers (1881–7)

During the 1880s, HSNC was no longer the only steam navigation company in Greece, and faced competition from two smaller ones without state subsidy, the Goudis and the Panhellenic Steam Navigation Company. Furthermore, the HSNC was not a company aiming only at profit like the other two, but since it was state subsidised and was always involved in all the external and internal political affairs (e.g. the overthrow of King Otho in 1862, the Cretan Revolution of 1866), it often became an object of local and national political dispute.60 In this context, between May 1881 and October 1883, the company bought six screw-driven steamers, four second hand and two new (see Appendix 9.3). The four second-hand vessels were the iron-hulled Elpis, Ermoupolis, Pineios and Chios, built between 1869 and 1878 in British yards. The new ones were the Pelops, an iron-hulled steamer built by Thomas Royden & Sons, Liverpool, and the Theseus, made of iron and steel, built in the Forges et Chantiers de la Mediterranee, La Seyne, France. Theseus was the largest and finest steamship of HSNC and made a great impression on her contemporaries for the quality of workmanship and her performance.61 The two new steamers were planned to serve the line to Thessaloniki, as part of the foreign policy of Greece. This decision caused a reaction from the press of Syros, who argued that the steamships had to connect the coasts of Smyrna and Asia Minor, where the interests of Greek trade lay, and not allow the foreign steamships companies to capture these markets.62 After negotiations, two more international lines were inaugurated in 1885, one to Thessaloniki and one to Corfu and the ports of the 59

60 61 62

http://shippingandshipbuilding.uk/view.php?official_number=&imo=&builder =10165&builder_eng=&year_built=&launch_after=&launch_before=&role=&type _ref1=&propulsion=&owner=&port=&flag=&disposal=&lost=&a1Page=3&ref =214495&vessel=IONIA (last accessed 30 January 2019); A.J. Arnold, Iron Shipbuilding on the Thames, 1832–1915: An Economic and Business History (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), 34. Kardasis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν [From Sail to Steam], 66–77. In the Syros newspapers Ήλιος, Πανόπη, Πατρίς of the second half of the nineteenth century there are plenty of articles about the involvement of the HSNC in local and national political affairs. Newspaper Πατρίς [Patris] no. 898, 8 October 1883, 2; Πανόπη [Panopi], no. 968, 1 October 1883, 2; no. 974, 22 October 1883, 1–2. Πανόπη [Panopi] no. 973, 18 October 1883, 3; Πατρίς [Patris] no. 895, 17 September 1883, 1; no. 900, 22 October 1883, 1.

208

Delis

Albanian coast, where more likely the two new steamers served.63 In 1887 two more steamers were added, Sfaktiria, with an iron hull and compound engine and Mykali, made of steel with a triple-expansion engine, built in 1884 and 1885, respectively. These steamers were initially bought by the Greek Government for the navy and were then sold to HSNC for 1,727,518 drs.64 The fleet of HSNC in the first phase (1856–64) was composed of steamers of 530 tonnes and nominal horsepower of 118 hp on average. Two and a half decades later, the steamers of the second group were of 884 grt and 188 hp on average. None of these were made of wood anymore; instead, Theseus was built of iron and steel and Sfaktiria of steel. The information about the first installed engines of the first group of steamers is scarce and not always clear. Lloyds Register of Shipping (from now on LR) in those years did not mention the type of engine. From another source, we learn that Omonoia had an oscillating engine of 120 hp, upgraded to the system of the compound engine in 1873.65 According to the same source, Hydra was built in 1856, Panellinion in 1857 and Eptanisos in 1860, and all had compound engines.66 It is not clear if these engines were the first installed in these steamers. LR and company sources mention that Hydra and Panellinion both have engines of 70 hp and not of 84 and 94 hp, respectively, as referred to in the Clyde ships database. However, if these engines were the first installed in the three vessels, it is only a few years after that Randolph and Elder patented the compound engine of 1853. Unfortunately, about the rest of the first group of steamers we have no other information except their nominal horsepower. Manning the steamships brought forward an innovation in the composition of crews, which up to then in Greece was related to seamanship in sailing ships. Steamships needed engine personnel (engineers, stokers, trimmers) and passenger steamers service personnel unknown to Greece at that time. This type of personnel, due to the nature of the work, created working environments 63 64 65

66

Kardasis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν [From Sail to Steam], 70. Πανόπη [Panopi], no. 1018, 4 April 1884, 1. Kardasis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν [From Sail to Steam], 55–56. https://www.clydeships.co.uk/view.php?year_built=&builder=&ref=25661&vessel =OMONOIA (last accessed 28 January 2019); Γενική Συνέλευσις των Μετόχων της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοίας, Συγκροτηθείσα εν Ερμουπόλει τη 10η Ιουνίου 1874 [General Assembly of the Shareholders of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company. Ermoupolis on 10 June 1874], 2. Hydra C.4Cy. (15, 32 × 24 in) 84 nhp.1-screw, Panellinion 1-screw, C.4Cy (16, 34 × 24 in) 94 nhp and Eptanisos C.2Cy. (24, 48 × 39 in), 125 hp, 1-screw. https://www.clydeships.co.uk/ view.php?year_built=&builder=&ref=2275&vessel=HYDRA, https://www.clydeships.co .uk/view.php?year_built=&builder=&ref=9895&vessel=PANELLINON, http://www.tees builtships.co.uk/view.php?year_built=&builder=&ref=169001&vessel=EPTANISSOS (last accessed 28 January 2019).

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

209

(engine room, deck and service area) on board and different types of, often conflicting, relations among the officers and the crew. The first engineers in Greece were British, as in many other parts of the Mediterranean and beyond, and several specialised artisans from other foreign countries like Italy and France.67 Engineers were needed not only on board but also in the arsenal, the technical base for HSNC’s steamers. This establishment, inaugurated in 1861, was the first of this kind in Greece and perhaps in the Eastern Mediterranean. In fact, the arsenal operated as a repairing base not only for the company’s steamers but also for all naval and commercial steamships sailing in those waters.68 In the first group of steamers (1856–64), the number and specialisation of the crews varied according to the size of the vessel. In 1866 (see Appendix 9.3), the paddle-driven Patris – ex Otho – had the largest crew, at thirty-six men, including all three-bridge officers, captain, lieutenant and sub lieutenant, and the chief, second and third engineers. No other steamer of that group had a third engineer, whereas only Eynomia  – ex Amalia  – Omonoia and Karteria had bridge officers. In the 1866 source (see Table 9.3), there are no data about kitchen and service personnel. However, we know from other sources that there were waiters, stewards and cooks on board the steamers. It is also mentioned that the service of the Greek steamers was not inferior to that of the French and Austrian ones, except for the quality of food and drinks, due to the lack of professionalism of the Greek suppliers.69 Forty years later in the crew list of the Elpis (956 tonnes and 218 nhp), out of the thirty men, seven were part of the kitchen and service personnel, including two stewards, two assistant stewards, an assistant (probably a cabin boy), two caterers and two cooks. It is interesting to note that in the Elpis, compared to the crew list of 1866 steamers, only three sailors are listed among the crew and no carpenter, which indicates

67

68

69

Olivier Raveux, Marseille, ville des métaux et de la vapeur au XIXe siècle (Paris: CNRS Éditions, 1998), 56–58; Mike Chrimes, ‘British and Irish Civil Engineers in the Development of Argentina in the Nineteenth Century’ in Malcolm Dunkeld et al. (eds), Proceedings of the Second International Congress on Construction History Queens College, Cambridge University, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 675–94. Newspaper Αστήρ των Κυκλάδων [Cyclades Star] no. 201–11, 30 April 1861; Ἐγγραφα της Ελληνικής Κυβερνήσεως και του Διοικητικού Συμβουλίου της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοίας. Αφορώντα εις τας περί ανανεώσεως της συμβάσεως διαπραγματεύσεις [Documents of the Greek Government and the Board of the HSNG in relation to the negotiations on the renewal of the contract], 37; Apostolos Delis, ‘From Parallel Growth to Great Divergence: Greek Shipbuilding from the Late Eighteenth to Early Twentieth Centuries’ in Ian Inkster (ed.), History of Technology, vol. 33, 33–34. Newspaper Εθνικό Μέλλον [National Future] no. 157, 3 July 1871, 3; Journal Πανδώρα [Pandora] 17/392 (1866), 214–15.

210

Delis

the technical modernisation and the gradual disengagement of the steamship from the use of sails (see Appendix 9.3). 5

The Fate of the Steamers of the HSNC

Most of the steamers of both groups turned into extremely long-lived investments. Some of them changed ownership and name more than once, some were requisitioned by the Hellenic Navy in times of war and peace, and several lasted up to the twentieth century (see Appendix 9.3). The Queen of Greece, renamed Aegean in 1862 after the flight of the royal couple Otho and Amalia, was an exception, as it had faced technical problems since the very beginning due to the bad combination of wooden hull with screw. In fact, in 1874, the decision was made to transform her into the company’s collier after removing her engine.70 The other two wooden steamers, Athinai and Ionio, were bought in 1864 by the Greek Government. The former was mentioned for the last time in a HSNC fleet’s list in 1875, while the latter was in service in 1885 and was put up for sale in 1889.71 The two paddle-driven Otho and Amalia, renamed Patris and Eunomia after 1862, faced the worst disasters. Patris, which was the shortest-lived, struck in a reef off the island of Kea and sunk in 1868 without any human losses.72 Eunomia, on the other hand, suffered severe damages on the after part of the ship when its powder magazine exploded off Spetses in 1871. The ship managed to return to Syros, with at least twenty-three casualties. After that, the ship underwent extensive reconstruction, which was completed in 1872, was renamed Iris and continued sailing until 1898, when she went for scrap after thirty-eight years of service.73

70

71 72 73

Newspaper Ερμούπολις [Hermoupolis] no. 500, 10 August 1874, 2; Γενική Συνέλευσις των Μετόχων της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοίας, Συγκροτηθείσα εν Ερμουπόλει τη 10η Ιουνίου 1874 [General Assembly of the Shareholders of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company. Ermoupolis on 10 June 1874], 3; Γενική Συνέλευσις των Μετόχων [General Meeting of Shareholders] 31 March 1877; Γενικός Ισολογισμός τη 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1875 [Balance of Payments 31 December 1875]. Γενική Συνέλευσις των Μετόχων, 31 March 1877, Γενικός Ισολογισμός τη 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1875; Annuaire Blengini. Guide Statistique, Historique, Diplomatique, Industriel et Commercial de la Grece (Torino, 1884–5), 294; Newspaper Ήλιος [Ilios] no. 263, 3 August 1889, 1. Newspaper Αστήρ των Κυκλάδων [Astir ton Kykladon] no. 569, 2 March 1868, 2. Πατρίς [Patris] no. 275, 22 June 1871 (έκτακτο παράρτημα); no. 276, 22 June 1871, 2; no. 277, 3 July 1871, 1–2. Ερμούπολις [Hermoupolis] no. 341, 26 June 1871, 1–2. Εθνικόν Μέλλον [Ethnikon Mellon] no. 157, 3 July 1871, 2–3; no. 160, 24 July 1871, 1–2. Πανόπη, [Panopi] no. 8, 2 July 1871, 1–2; no. 9, 8 July 1871, 2–3, no. 12, 29 July 1871, 1–2, Πατρίς [Patris] no. 327, 15 July 1872, 2.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

211

The iron screw-driven vessels of the company proved far more resilient. The shortest-lived was Byzantion, which sank after twenty-eight years of service. The ship ran aground off Syros in 1888 due to fog and bad visibility but without human losses.74 Similarly, Eptanissos ran aground off the entrance of the Pagasetic Gulf in 1905 and was abandoned by the New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company at the age of 45 years.75 Karteria was sold in 1892 to the steamship company of John MacDowall and Barbour in Piraeus and was renamed Thetis, sold again in 1904 to the Cretan Shipping Co of G. Hatzigrigorakis, consul of the Russian Empire in Crete (renamed Enossis). After some damage, Hatzigrigorakis transferred the ownership to the Panhellenic Steam Navigation Company, and this is the last ever mention of the vessel.76 Hydra, Panellinion and Omonoia were the vessels that lasted longer between both groups of steamers of the HSNC. Hydra and Panellinion, engaged in the operations during the Cretan Revolution (1866–9), changed owners several times after the dissolution of the HSNC, but always kept their name. Finally, Panellinion was wrecked at Imbros Island in 1918 due to a gale, which also killed twenty people.77 Hydra was lost in 1926 after a collision with another Greek steamer, Kronos, off the coast of Laurio.78 Panellinion and Hydra were sixty-two and seventy years old, respectively. Omonoia, the oldest vessel, changed owners and names many times and was last mentioned as Laconia in the LR in 1936. She was seventy-seven years old.79 The steamers of the second group, which were of another technological generation, proved also to be very enduring, with an average lifespan of fifty years. Only Elpis sank in 1904, her twenty-sixth year, near Burgas due to a heavy storm in a maritime disaster that shocked and traumatised the society of Syros, even more than Eunomia thirty-three years ago. The ship in the service of the newly found HSNC was lost with all hands and

74 75 76

77 78 79

Ήλιος [Ilios] no. 124, 2 October 1888, 2–3; no. 227, 16 October 1888, 2; no. 228, 23 October 1888, 3. Πατρίς [Patris] no. 2057, 20 August 1905, 2–3; no. 2058, 27 August 1905, 2. Antonios Foustanos, Ημερολόγιον της Σύρου [Calendar of Syros], 1902, 133; Manos Perakis, ‘Δομικός ανασχηματισμός υπό την επίδραση ριζικών αλλαγών στο νησί της Κρήτης, 1877–1913’ [Structural Reformation Under the Influence of Radical Changes in Crete, 1877–1913] ανακοίνωση στα Σεμινάρια Ελληνικής Εταιρείας Οικονομικής Ιστορίας [Lecture in the Seminars of the Hellenic Society of Economic History], 29 October 2010, 20–21; https://forum.nautilia .gr/showthread.php?81062-%C8%DD%F4%E9%F2-(1)-%CA%E1%F1%F4%E5%F1% DF%E1-Thetis-Karteria (last accessed 5 February 2019). Newspaper Σημαία [Simaia] no. 257, 22 March 1918, 2; no. 258, 23 March 1918, 3, f. 279, 17 April 1918, 2. Σημαία [Simaia], no. 2165, 15 November 1926, 4. Lloyd’s Register, Steamships and Motorships, 1930–1, 1931–2 and 1935–6.

212

Delis

passengers.80 Theseus, renamed as Isla de Menorca after being sold in 1900 to the La Marítima, Compañía Mahonesa de Vapores, was bombed in 1938 during the Spanish Civil War while in the service of the Compañía Trasmediterránea at the age of fifty-five.81 Another five steamers of the second group, Mykali, Chios, Pinios, Ermoupoli and Pelops, went for scrap after forty-eight years of service (see Appendix 9.3). 6

The Lines of HSNC

National integration was obtained through the communication lines that connected the interior of the country as well as the Greek ports with the foreign ports in the Ottoman Empire and the British Ionian Isles (up to 1864). The first lines were designed in 1856 by the Public Postal Office to serve the communication necessities of the state. The first lines (see Map 9.1) tried to embrace most of Greece at the time, from the northern borders in the Maliakos Gulf, around the Peloponnese and the major islands of the Cyclades.82 The service encountered difficulties, since the three steamers were not sufficient to continuously cover all these lines and often needed repairs that disrupted communication.83 In August 1858, with the arrival of the new steamers Omonoia and Karteria, the lines were extended to Crete and Thessaloniki. The outbreak of the Italian War in 1859 presented an opportunity for HSNC to extend its lines to Trieste, but Austrian Lloyd and the Habsburg authorities would not allow a foreign intrusion into the territory of their operations, and soon the service stopped.84 Constantinople was also introduced as a foreign destination in 1859 and when the Ionian Islands were integrated into the Greek kingdom, in 1864, two old steamers, Athinai and Ionia, were bought second hand for the necessities of the new line.85 According to the 1857 balance sheet only five lines ran within the realm of the Greek kingdom. Four years later, more domestic lines were added as well as external lines to Crete, Constantinople, Southern Turkey, as it was called, and a line that linked Constantinople to Corfu, both ports outside the Greek kingdom. In 1864, there were two lines to the Ottoman Empire: one called European Turkey, more likely including ports of the Aegean like Volos and Thessaloniki, and another called Asiatic Turkey, probably including the port of 80 81 82 83 84 85

Πατρίς [Patris] f. 2017, 13 November 1904, 1; f. 2018, 20 November 1904, 1–2. https://www.trasmeships.es/los-buques/isla-de-menorca/ (last accessed 5 February 2019). Κανονισμός της Υπηρεσίας των Ελληνικών Ατμοπλοίων [Regulation of the Greek Steamers’ Service], 1; Γενική Συνέλευσις 1858. Γενική Συνέλευσις 1858, 5. Υπόμνημα Συνοπτικόν, 10–11. Υπόμνημα Συνοπτικόν, 30.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

Map 9.1

213

The first four lines of HSNC, 1856

Smyrna and perhaps other islands of the Eastern Aegean. The Ionian Islands as a separate line appears for the first time in the balance sheet of 1865, whereas, prior to their integration into Greece they were included in the Gulf of Corinth line. In 1865, an outbreak of cholera in the ports of the Ottoman Empire interrupted the service for months and reduced the company’s revenues.86 In 1866, the outbreak of the Cretan Revolution (1866–8) interrupted the lines to the Ottoman Empire once more. Some of the company’s steamers, like Panellinion and Hydra, were employed in the transport of refugees from Crete to the Greek kingdom. All men and resources of the company were mobilised during the entire period of war.87 The domestic lines continued uninterrupted, and the connection with the Ottoman Empire was reassumed in 1881, according to the company’s balance sheets. The renewal of the contract between the company and the Greek Government for the privilege of the service of sea communications in 1876 included only domestic lines. In 1881, Thessaly was annexed to the Greek kingdom, and the port of Volos and other minor ports that formerly belonged to the Ottoman 86 87

Γενική Συνέλευσις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοϊας, Συγκροτηθείσα εν Ερμουπόλει την 28 Απριλίου 1866 [General Assembly of the Shareholders of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company, 28 April 1866], 3. Γενική Συνέλευσις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοϊας, Συγκροτηθείσα εν Ερμουπόλει τη 10 Ιουνίου 1868 [General Assembly of the Shareholders of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company, 10 June 1868], 2–3.

214

Delis

Empire were included in the domestic lines. Furthermore, during the same year, the connection with Ottoman Crete was re-established with the appointment of new agents in the major ports of the island.88 By 1882 a new line to Brindisi via Corinth, Patras and Corfu was also initiated, and in 1887 a line to Epirus and the Albanian coasts from Preveza up to Bar, a small sea port in southern Montenegro, was already in service. Similarly in 1887, the unified line connecting the Gulf of Euboea to the Gulf of Volos and the Gulf of Thermaikos was in service, with steamer ending in Thessaloniki, the most important Ottoman port of the Balkans (see Map 9.2).89 After 1882, HSNC had to face the competition of two new domestic navigation companies, the Panellinion, with six steamers, and Goudis, with four. However, HSNC covered the most extensive part of the country and beyond, to foreign ports, while the two other non-subsidised companies focused only on the most profitable lines. The Panellinion company operated the line around the Peloponnese, the Gulf of Euboea and the Gulf of Volos, Western Greece and the Ionian Islands, and Goudis sailed around the Peloponnese, the Argolic Gulf line and the Gulf of Euboea up to Volos.90 In fact, the profitability of many of the lines of HSNC was one of the main issues addressed since the very beginning by the board of directors to the Greek Government. The external lines were constantly the most profitable ones, while the major ports of the Ottoman Empire, Smyrna, Constantinople, Thessaloniki, were the most desirable destinations for the shareholders. However, frequent hostilities between Greece and the Ottoman Empire during the nineteenth century prevented a more regular and sustainable connection with these ports, where great business and mercantile Greek communities resided. Among the domestic lines, the Peloponnese line was the most profitable throughout the period 1857–81. The Ionian Islands line proved the second most profitable, whereas the Gulf of Euboea and the Argolis Gulf lines had a decent share for most of the period. These lines included important commercial cities and towns of Greece, like Syros, Piraeus, Patras, Nafplio, Corfu, Cephalonia, Zakynthos and so on, and carried not only a larger number of 88 89

90

Γενική Συνέλευσις των Μετόχων της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοϊας, Συγκροτηθείσα εν Ερμουπόλει τη 22 και 23 Μαρτίου 1882 [General Assembly of the Shareholders of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company, 22–23 March 1882], 3, 5. Αναχωρήσεις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοίας εκ Πειραιώς [Departures of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company] Εν Αθήναις εκ του τυπογραφείου του Ανδρέου Κορομηλά, 1882; Konstantinos Skokos, Ετήσιον Ημερολόγιον, Χρονογραφικόν, Φιλολογικόν και Γελοιογραφικόν του έτους 1887 [Annual Calendar of the Events, Philological and Satirical of the Year 1887], 28, 31–33; John Edwin Sandys, An Easter Vacation in Greece (London and New York: Macmillan, 1887), 154–5, 164. Skokos, Ετήσιον Ημερολόγιον, 35–39.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

Map 9.2

215

Extension of Lines and Destinations (1887–8)

passengers but also a higher quantity of goods that raised the revenues. The board of directors systematically complained about the inconvenience of the lines of the Cyclades, except Syros, as well as those of Western Greece, like Akarnania, where steamers had to touch small rural ports.91 This argument was used to justify the necessity of the state subsidy, but on the other hand, the data on the profitability of the lines of the years 1857 to 1881, according to the balance sheets, showed that the Cyclades line was constantly among the less profitable lines. In fact, the HSNC’s competitors excluded these islands from their schedule in the 1880s. The policy and the support the state provided to the HSNC did not follow the logic of business rationality and profitability strictu sensu. National 91

Έγγραφα της Ελληνικής Κυβερνήσεως και του Διοικητικού Συμβουλίου της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοία. Αφορώντα εις τας περί ανανεώσεως της συμβάσεως διαπραγματεύσεις [Papers of the Greek Government and of the Committee of the HSNC Regarding the Negotiations for a New Subsidy Convention], 66; Γενική Συνέλευσις 1862, 3; 1870, 4, 6; 1874, 4, 31 March 1877, 5.

216

Delis

Table 9.1 Percentage of the total revenues of voyages of the HSNC per line Lines

1857

Peloponnese Argolis Gulf Gulf of Corinth and Ionian Islands Gulf of Corinth Ionian Islands Kalamaki (Corinth area) Akarnania Cyclades ConstantinopleCorfu Cyclades and Crete Crete Euboea and Maliakos Gulf Gulf of Euboea Gulf of Euboea and Gulf of Volos Constantinople Southern Turkey European Turkey Asiatic Turkey Piraeus Extraordinary voyages

57.22 20.10 18.75 27.60 12.26 11.41 3.13 8.97 7.78

4.92

1861

1864

1865

1867

24.98 8.87

27.28 33.37 33.20 33.44 34.33 41.18 42.42 7.95 10.13 10.22 9.52 9.85 3.95 3.78 3.38 7.42 2.66 3.53 3.44 1.97 1.03 16.58 17.48 14.64 13.76 21.75 27.29 18.71 7.59 11.25 11.86 12.38 3.35 3.92 2.91

4.92

4.06

7.05 14.57 1.90

0.70 1.90 8.05

0.58 1.54

1.78 1.87

1.76 2.11

1869

2.69 2.51

1870

3.11 3.06

1871

2.61 3.11

1875

2.96 3.79

1880 1881

4.61 5.37 2.82 11.40a

0.85 7.12

5.58

7.64 15.20

12.37 14.64 13.76

9.67 24.38

26.43 15.63

3.15 13.76

20.13 8.93 1.79 7.27

6.92 5.26 2.04 12.22

3.11 0.87

2.66 0.85

2.75 1.17

12.40

3.08 1.09

0.89 0.98

14.23

0.16

a Crete included from 1881. Source: Processed data from annual balance sheets from Γενική Συνέλευσις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοΐας years 1858, 1862, 1865, 1866, 1868, 1870, 1872, 1873, 1877, 1882.

integration and state control over the national territory were the principal aims of the Greek governments. Efficient maritime transport was the best way to unify and keep in contact a fragmented territory comprising islands and extensive coasts. HSNC, despite the fact that it was not entirely a state-owned company, functioned very much as the main vehicle for the implementation of public policy.92 Furthermore, foreign connections, especially with ports of the Ottoman Empire, functioned not only as profitable lines but also as 92

Εφημερίς των Συζητήσεων της Βουλής [Hellenic Parliamentary Papers], Περίοδος Ζ’, Σύνοδος Γ’, 10 October 1877–30 January 1878, 77–78, 90–92.

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

217

instruments of foreign policy, since a considerable number of Greek populations and Greek mercantile communities resided therein. Therefore, state subsidy was a sine qua non condition for the sustainability of less profitable lines and despite the company’s concern to satisfy its shareholders, it was common knowledge to the contemporaries that HSNC was far from being a strictly private enterprise aiming only at profit maximisation. 7

Epilogue

The history of HSNC is inextricably connected to the history of the introduction of passenger steam navigation, iron shipbuilding and marine engineering in Greece. These latter aspects are not included in the analysis of this chapter, but are treated in another paper and are still part of an ongoing research for the Arsenal of Syros, the first establishment of this kind in the country.93 The company, having as major shareholders the Greek State and the National Bank of Greece and being subsidised by the state, had informally but substantially a public character, which was also the cause of almost permanent debt. This dependency from the state  – which essentially created the company  – was also the reason for its final bankruptcy, due to great competition by other steamship companies after the 1880s and the conflict by its competitors on the economic (tariff war) as well as on the political field (lobbying for the repeal of the privilege and subsidies to the company).94 Despite its bankruptcy in 1893, HSNC contributed largely to the modernisation of the maritime communications of Greece. In these thirty-seven years, the company managed to establish an effective network of communications which covered the largest part of the national territory, from small rural ports to bigger commercial and maritime centres. It also connected Greece with foreign ports of economic and political interest, like Smyrna, Crete, Constantinople and Thessaloniki in the Ottoman Empire, with a considerable Greek population. The impact of this novelty was immediate and covered multiple aspects of everyday life: economic, social and cultural. Passengers, goods and species travelled with safety and efficiency during these thirty-seven years across the country contributing to its economic and social welfare. In fact, extremely few tragedies occurred with the company’s steamers, and in most cases of shipwreck there were no human losses. The steamers were commercially successful, since they lasted for several decades of continuous service. Those of the first generation, in particular, were 93 94

Delis, ‘From Parallel Growth’. Kardasis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν, 38–87.

218

Delis

all new vessels built by shipbuilding and engineering firms of high reputation in the United Kingdom. They were built with cutting-edge technology, all but one made of iron hull and most of them screw-driven exactly in the period of the transition in steamship technology from wood to iron and from paddle to screw. Along with the ships, new professions, new specialities, new skills and new potential arose. Engine and service crew working next to the previously existing deck crew transformed the world of maritime labour in Greece, the existent hierarchies, the working conditions on board and the working perspectives of the labourers. In daily life, the speed and regularity of communications, along with the organisation of a company oriented to mainly transporting people, changed radically the pattern and the experience of the sea voyages in Greece. Passengers no longer had to look for a reliable captain and a safe sailing ship to carry them along with merchandise from one destination to another in voyages of unpredictable duration. They could buy tickets according to the class they could afford and travel on scheduled passages in predicted time and in comfort never seen up to then. All these conditions gradually created a passenger culture that was expressed in various ways, in literature as well as in letters written by passengers, which were published in newspapers of Piraeus or Syros and described the experience of the voyage on the steamers. Therefore, it is natural that contemporaries associated HSNC with the establishment of steam navigation in Greece and the company was almost considered a national asset. In fact, the strict association of the company with the state resulted in many things. Greek governments tried to institute steamship communications across the country and the foundation of the HSNC in 1855 was the successful outcome of their long-term efforts. The investments and the large share the state had in the company, as well as the contract that protected HSNC from competition but at the same time prioritised public policy over the company’s profit, demonstrate their interdependent relationship. Furthermore, the fact that the company was almost bound to serve the government in all cases of national emergency or necessity (overthrow of King Otho, Cretan War) was far beyond the limits of a subsidised, profit-oriented private company. HSNC, during its existence, very much had the character of a public utility company, which is overlooked by historians but becomes so evident when someone examines carefully the existing documentation and the strategies implemented throughout its history.

219

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece



Appendices

Table 9.2 The fleet of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company, 1855–60 Horse Shipbuilder, Cost of Lloyd evaluapower location and conyear of con- struction tion (pounds/ struction tonne)

Ship name

Hull material

Propulsion Dimensions in metres and length/max breadth ratio

Tonnage (nrt/grt/ bm)

Queen of Greece

Timber

Propeller

274/521

70

181/267/ 354

70

Panellinion

Iron (4 compartments) Hydra Iron (5 compartments) Omonoia Iron (4 compartments) Karteria Iron (4 compartments) Otho Iron (4 compartments) Amalia Iron (4 compartments) Eptanisos Iron (4 compartments) Byzantion Iron (4 compartments)

Propeller

41.45 × 8.53 × 5.02 (4.85/1) 47.64 × 6.7 × 3.77 (7.11/1)

Propeller

47.79 × 6.73 × 3.62 (7.13/1)

189/278/ 354

70

Propeller

56.38 × 7.65 × 4.57 (7.36/1)

315/464/ 565

Propeller

58.52 × 7.68 × 4.54 (7.61/1)

Paddle wheel

Pile Jr, W., Sunderland, 1855 J Henderson & Son, Glasgow 1856

21.92

10

21.92

12 A1

Blackwood 21.92 & Gordon, Glasgow 1856

12

120

John Reid & Co Glasgow, 1858

26.88

12 A1

278/469/ 565

120

J & G Thom- 26.88 son, Glasgow, 1858

12 A1

66.23 × 8.38 × 4.48 (7.90/1)

641/748

180

C. Lungley & 27.90 Co, London 1860

6 A1

Paddle wheel

66.20 × 8.35 × 4.45 (7.92/1)

640/748

180

C. Lungley & 27.90 Co, London 1860

6 A1

Propeller

56.38 × 8.07 × 4.72 (6.98/1)

488/631

120

12 A1

Propeller

60.31 × 7.74 × 4.78 (7.79/1)

477/613

120

Pile, Spence 24.89 and Co, West Hartlepool 1860 Lawrie, 23.11 J.G. Glasgow, 1860

Source: Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, 1863, 75, 158, 220, 258, 261, 344, 351, 375.

12 A1

220

Delis

Table 9.3 Steamers integrated in the company’s fleet in the period 1881–7 Ship name

Hull Propul- Dimensions Tonnage (nrt/grt) material sion in metres and length/ max breadth ratio

Elpis

Iron

Screw

Ermoup- Iron olis

Screw

Pinios

Iron

Screw

Chios

Iron

Screw

Pelops

Iron

Screw

Theseus Iron and Screw Steel Sfaktiria Steel

Screw

Mykali

Screw

Iron

Horse power

Engine type

Shipbuilder, location and year of construction

Period of integration

Barrow SB Co, May Barrow in Fur- 1881 ness, 1878 67.3 × 8.9 978/602 162 2-cyl. (42 in × Blackwood & June × 4.6 30 in) 150 nhp Gordon, Glas- 1881 gow, (7.56/1) Post 1876: 1869 Compound 2-cyl. (29½ in & 57 in × 36 in) J & G Thomson, October 65.5 × 8.65 × 778/490 150 Compound 1881 4.72 2cyl (31 in & Glasgow, (7.57/1) 57 in × 45 in), 1869 150 hp, 1-Screw 70.19 × 9.35 923/537 150 C2cyl (31 & 57 × Robert Steele August 1882 × 4.75 45 in, & Co, (7.50/1) 1-Screw Glasgow, 1876 70.10 × 9.1 × 973/613 208 C2- Cy 32’ Thomas Royden October 4.72 62”-42 & Sons, Liver- 1883 (7.70/1) pool, 1883 71.30 × 9 × 1004/632 180 (720 Forges et Chant- October 5.5 expanded iers, La Seyne, 1883 (7.92/1) hp) 1883 J & G Thomson, 1887 64.16 × 9.9 831/271 260 2-pair com(6.45/1) pound direct Glasgow, acting inverted 1884 cyldrs 2 × 30” 2 × 60”. 36” stroke 935/ Triple expan- Earle’s SB & E 1887 sion 3Cy Co, Hull, 28&43–70&39 1885

73.2 × 9.1 × 956/606 4.88 (8.04/1)

218

Compound, 2-cyl

Sources: Kardasis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν, 62. http://www.clydesite.co.uk http:// clydeships.co.uk/ http://miramarshipindex.org Πατρίς no. 1414, 30 June 1893, 1–2. Πανόπη no. 968, 1 October 1883, 2.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1

748 692 613 565 565 354 354 520

230 748

510 956

Patris ex Otho Eptanisos Byzantion Omonoia Karteria Panellinion Hydra Aegean ex Queen of Greece Ionia Eunomia ex Amalia Athinai ex Otho Elpis

1

1

1 1

1

Captain Lieutenanta

Tonnage

Vessel

Table 9.4 Crews of the Steamers 1866 and Elpis 1904

1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Sub Chief Lieutenant Engineer

1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Second Engineer 1

1 1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4

4 4

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

2 3

6 1

11 10 10 11 9 6 7 9

Third Boatswain Assistant Helms- Seamen Engineer Boatswain men

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

221

1

230 748 510 956

5 3 2 3

5 6 5 5 5 4 3 4

2

3

6 3 3 3 3 2 2 2

Trimmers

1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2

Carpenter Steward

2

1

Assistant Assistant stewards

2

Caterer

2

Cook

26 16 11 28 (30)a, b

36 31 30 32 30 24 24 27

Total

a The data for Eunomia are incomplete. Furthermore, it is mentioned that apprentices manned the ship. b For two out of the thirty men of the crew, there is no information about their specialisation. Source: General State Archives, Syros, ΓΑΚ/ΑΝΚ ΣΥΡΟΥ, Ι ΣΤΑΤΙΣΤΙΚΑ, 1. Newspaper Πατρίς [Homeland] no. 2017, 13 November 1904, 1.

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

748 692 613 565 565 354 354 520

Patris Eptanisos Byzantion Omonoia Karteria Panellinion Hydra Aegean ex Queen of Greece Ionia) Eunomia ex Amalia Athinai ex Otho Elpis

Chief Firemen fireman

Tonnage

Vessel

Table 9.4 Crews of the Steamers 1866 and Elpis 1904 (cont.)

222 Delis

Hydra

70

Transformed to collier in 1875, still in service in 1881 Shipwrecked 62 after hit by torpedo (1918)

Fate of the ship Age

New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1893) Forges et chantiers de Syra (1906) Cycladic Steam Navigation (1909) Anonymous Hellenic Company of Maritime Enterprises (1916) Collision with New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company another ship (1893) (1926) Forges et chantiers de Syra (1906) Cycladic Steam Navigation (1909) Anonymous Hellenic Company of Maritime enterprises (1916) Piraeus Steam Navigation Domestinis and Oikonomou (1921) Georgios Georgiou Steam Navigation (1921)

Aegean (1862)

Queen of Greece

Panellinion

Following Following owner name

Name of ship when came to Previous Previous owner the service of the HSNC name

Table 9.5 The career and fate of the steamers of the HSNC

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

223

New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1893)

Run aground (1905)

Shipwrecked (1868) Scrap (1898)

45

38

8

Last mentioned 46 (1904)

a Omonoia sold to unknown shipowners between 1894 and 1899. b In 1919 appears as Ioulia belonging to National Steam Navigation of Greece, but I have no evidence of when exactly it was sold and when the name was changed to Ioulia.

Eptanisos

Amalia

Damigos and Ladopoulos (1892)

Patris (1862) Evnomia (1862) Iris (1871)

Otho

Karteria

Scrap (1935)

ThessalonikiNew Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1894, 1899)a (1908) Hermoupolis Steam Navigation Ioulia (1906) (1919)b National Steam Navigation of Greece Kea (1919)b (1920) Tsegos and Samothrakis Laconia (1925) (1925) Laconian Steam Navigation (1931–2) John MacDowall and Barbour Thetis (1892) (1892) George Hadjigrigorakis Enossis (1904) (1904)

Omonoia

77

Fate of the ship Age

Following Following owner name

Name of ship when came to Previous Previous owner the service of the HSNC name

Table 9.5 The career and fate of the steamers of the HSNC (cont.)

224 Delis

Truthful (1878)

Galata (1869) Wicklow (1872)

Raven (1869)

Elpis

Hermoupolis

Pinios

Ionio

Athinai

Byzantion

G & J Burns Ltd Glasgow, (1869)

F.H. Powell & Co, Liverpool (1878) W. Burrell and W.E. McLaren, Glasgow, (1870) J. Lane, Λίβερπουλ (1871) Clyde Shipping Co, Glasgow (1872)

Name of ship when came to Previous Previous owner the service of the HSNC name Shipwrecked (1888) Last mentioned (1880) Last mentioned (1890) Shipwrecked (1904)

64

61

26

54

43

28

Fate of the ship Age

Scrap (1930) New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1893) Forges et chantiers de Syra (1906) Cycladic Steam Navigation (1909) Anonymous Hellenic Company of Maritime Enterprises (1916) Scrap (1933) Themisto- New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1893) cles Forges et chantiers de Syra (1927) (1906) Karistos Cycladic Steam Navigation Toya (1909) (1929) Anonymous Hellenic Company of Maritime Enterprises (1916) Stylianos Mantafounis (1927) K. Toyas Steam Navigation (1929)

New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1893)

Following Following owner name

Table 9.5 The career and fate of the steamers of the HSNC (cont.)

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

225

Pelops

Chios

Portland (1876)

Bubulina (1927) Paros (1933)

55

58

Fate of the ship Age

Scrap (1934) New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1893) Forges et chantiers de Syra (1906) Cycladic Steam Navigation (1909) Anonymous Hellenic Company of Maritime Enterprises (1916) Spetses Steam Navigation (1929) Scrap (1938) New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1893) Forges et chantiers de Syra (1906) Cycladic Steam Navigation (1909) Anonymous Hellenic Company of Maritime Enterprises (1916) K. Petsalis, 55% (1925) Ionian Steam Navigation (1927) National Steam Navigation of Greece (1929)

Following Following owner name

Clyde Shipping Co, Spetses Glasgow (1876) (1930)

Name of ship when came to Previous Previous owner the service of the HSNC name

Table 9.5 The career and fate of the steamers of the HSNC (cont.)

226 Delis

Eldorado (1885)

Mykali

T. Wilson, Sons and Mykali Toya Anonymous Hellenic Company of Maritime Co Ltd, Hull (1929) Enterprises (1885) (1916) Stylianos Mantafounis (1927) K. Toyas Steam Navigation (1929)

G & J Burns, Glasgow (1884)

Scrap (1933)

48

Last mentioned 37 (1921)

Bombed by air- 55 plane (1938)

Fate of the ship Age

Source: Lloyd’s Register of Ships, www.clydeships.co.uk www.clydeships.co.uk Newspapers: Σημαία (Flag) no. 257, 22 March 1918, 2; no. 258, 23 March 1918, 3; no. 279, 17 April 1918, 2; no. 1226, 30 June 1921, 2; no. 1295, 20 September 1921, 2; no. 2165, 15 November 1926, 4; no. 2672, 1 January 1926, 9; no. 1753, 19 April 1923, 3; no. 2667, 23 December 1925, 2; no. 2203, 1 January 1926, 12; no. 2499, 1 January 1928, 5; no. 2851, 22 May 1929, 4; no. 2853, 24 May 1929, 4; Σφαίρα (Globe) no. 11317, 30 October 1919, 2; no. 11416, 12 March 1920, 2; no. 11547, 1 July 1920, 1.

Buzzard (1884)

Sfaktiria

Isla de Menorca (1900)

Theseus

‘La Marítima, Compañía Mahonesa de Vapores’, Port Mahon (1900) ‘Compañía Trasmediterránea’, Barcelona, (1919)

Following Following owner name

Name of ship when came to Previous Previous owner the service of the HSNC name

Table 9.5 The career and fate of the steamers of the HSNC (cont.)

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

227

228

Delis

Bibliography Agriantoni Christina, ‘Η ελληνική οικονομία στον πρώτο βιομηχανικό αιώνα’ [Greek Economy in the first industrial century] in Vassilis Panayotopoulos (ed.), Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού, 1770–2000 [History of Modern Hellenism, 1770–2000], vol. 4 (Athens: Ellinika Grammata, 2003), 61–74. Armstrong John and David M. Williams, The Impact of Technological Change: The Early Steamship in Britain, Research in Maritime History, no. 47 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 2011). Arnold A.J., Iron Shipbuilding on the Thames, 1832–1915: An Economic and Business History (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000). Barry P., The Dockyards and the Private Shipyards of the Kingdom (London: Sampson Low, 1863). Berneron-Couvenhes Marie-Françoise, Les Messageries Maritimes. L’essor d’une grande compagnie de navigation française 1851–1894 (Paris: Presses Paris Sorbonne, 2007). Chrimes Mike, ‘British and Irish Civil Engineers in the Development of Argentina in the Nineteenth Century’ in Malcolm Dunkeld et al. (eds), Proceedings of the Second International Congress on Construction History Queens College, Cambridge University, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 675–94. Corlett E.C.B., ‘The Screw Propeller and Merchant Shipping 1840–1865’ in Robert Gardiner (ed.), The Advent of Steam. The merchant marine before 1900, (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1993), 83–105. Delis Apostolos, ‘From Parallel Growth to Great Divergence: Greek Shipbuilding from the Late Eighteenth to Early Twentieth Centuries’ in Ian Inkster (ed.), History of Technology in Greece from 19th to the 20th Centuries, vol. 33 (2017), 21–46. Delis Apostolos, Mediterranean Wooden Shipbuilding: Economy, Technology and Institutions in the Nineteenth Century (Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2015). Dertilis Georgios, Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Κράτους [History of the Greek State], vol. B (Athens: Estia, 2005). Dertilis Georgios, Banquiers, usuriers et paysans réseaux de crédit et stratégies du capital en Grèce, 1780–1930 (Paris: Fondation des Treilles, Éditions la Découverte, 1988). Flandreau Marc and Stefano Ugolini, ‘Where It All Began: Lending of Last Resort and the Bank of England during the Overend-Gurney panic of 1866’ (February 16, 2011). Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Working Paper No. 04/2011, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1765893. Foustanos Antonios, Ημερολόγιον της Σύρου [Calendar of Syros], (n.p., 1902). Greenhill Basil, ‘Steam Before the Screw’, Robert Gardiner (ed.), The Advent of Steam: The Merchant Steamship Before 1900 (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1993).

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

229

Griffiths Denis, ‘Marine Engineering Development in the Nineteenth Century’ in Robert Gardiner (ed.), The Advent of Steam: The Merchant Steamship Before 1900 (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1993), 160–178. Harlaftis Gelina, A History of Greek-owned Shipping: The Making of an International Tramp Fleet, 1830 to the Present Day (London: Routledge, 1996). Hollingshead John, The Illustrated Catalogue of the International Exhibition, British Division, Volume II (London: n.p., 1862), Class XII. Kardasis Vasilis, Από του ιστίου εις τον ατμόν. Ελληνική Εμπορική Ναυτιλία (1858–1914) [From Sail to Steam: Greek Merchant Marine (1858–1914)] (Athens: ΕΤΒΑ, 1993). Kehayias Elias and Alex Domestinis, Υπόμνημα Συνοπτικόν της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοΐας [Memorandum of the Hellenic Steam Navigation] (Athens: n.p., 1869). Koliopoulos Ioannis, Περί λύχνων αφάς: η ληστεία στην Ελλάδα (19ος αι.) [Brigandage in Greece in the 19th Century] (Thessaloniki: Vanias, 1994). Macarthur William Forrest, History of Port Glasgow (Glasgow: Jackson, Wylie & Co, 1932). MacGregor David R., Merchant Sailing Ships, 1850–75: Heyday of Sail (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1984). Mahate Ashraf A., ‘Contagion Effects of Three Late Nineteenth Century British Bank Failures’, Business and Economic History 23/1, 1994, 102–15. Murray Andrew, Robert Murray and Augustin F.B. Creuze, Shipbuilding in Iron and Wood (Edinburgh: A. and C. Black, 1863). Ortolan André, Traité élémentaire des machines à vapeur marines rédigé d’après le programme du concours pour le brevet de capitaine au long cours et de maitre au cabotage, Troisième Édition (Paris: n.p., 1859). Panopoulou Maria, Οικονομικά και τεχνικά προβλήματα στην ελληνική ναυπηγική βιομηχανία 1850–1914 [Economic and Technical Problems in the Greek Shipbuilding Industry 1850–1914] (Athens: KEPE, 1993). Papathanassopoulos Konstantinos, Εταιρεία Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοΐας (1855–72). Τα αδιέξοδα του προστατευτισμού [Hellenic Steam Navigation Company (1855–72): The Impasse of Protectionism] (Athens: Cultural Foundation of National Bank, 1988). Papathanassopoulos Konstantinos, Ελληνική εμπορική ναυτιλία (1833–1856). Εξέλιξη και αναπροσαρμογή. [Greek Merchant Marine, (1833–1856): Development and Readjustment] (Athens: Cultural Foundation of National Bank, 1983). Paraskevopoulos Dionysis, ‘Choosing Locomotives in the Formative Period of the Greek Railways, 1880–1910’ in Ian Inkster (ed.), History of Technology, vol. 33 (2017), 47–80. Parkhill John, The History of Paisley (Paisley: R. Stewart, 1857). Peebles H.B., ‘A Study in Failure: J. & G. Thomson and Shipbuilding at Clydebank, 1871–1890’, Scottish Historical Review 69 (1990), 22–48.

230

Delis

Perakis Manos, ‘Δομικός ανασχηματισμός υπό την επίδραση ριζικών αλλαγών στο νησί της Κρήτης, 1877–1913’ [Structural Reformation Under the Influence of Radical Changes in Crete, 1877–1913] ανακοίνωση στα Σεμινάρια Ελληνικής Εταιρείας Οικονομικής Ιστορίας [Lecture in the Seminars of the Hellenic Society of Economic History], 29 October 2010. Politis Alexis, ‘Brigandage  – excédents économiques  – élevage: Hypothèses pour une définition de l’interimbrication de ces éléments dans un circuit commun (XVIII–XIXe s.)’ in Maria Christina Chatziioannou and A. Tabaki (eds), Actes du IIe Colloque International d’Histoire. Economies Méditerranéennes. Equilibres et Intercommunications. XIIIe–XIXe siècles, Tome II (Athens: INR/NHRF, 1986), 155–70. Raveux Olivier, Marseille, ville des métaux et de la vapeur au XIXe siècle (Paris: CNRS Éditions, 1998). Richmond Thomas, The Local Records of Stockton and the Neighbourhood, or, a register of memorable events, chronologically arranged, which have occurred in and near Stockton and the north-eastern parts of Cleveland (Stockton-London: n.p., 1868). Sandys John Edwin, An Easter Vacation in Greece (London and New York: Macmillan, 1887). Skokos Konstantinos, Ετήσιον Ημερολόγιον, Χρονογραφικόν, Φιλολογικόν και Γελοιογραφικόν του έτους 1887 [Annual Calendar of the Events, Philological and Satirical of the Year 1887]. Slaven Anthony, ‘Modern British Shipbuilding, 1800–1990’ in L.A. Ritchie (ed.), The Shipbuilding Industry: A Guide to Historical Records (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992), 1–24. Slaven Anthony, ‘The Shipbuilding Industry’ in Roy Church (ed.), The Dynamics of Victorian Business (London: Routledge, 1980), 107–125. Smith Crosbie, Coal, Steam and Ships: Engineering, Enterprise and Empire on the Nineteenth-Century Seas (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018). Starkey David J., ‘The Industrial Background of the Development of Steam’, in Robert Gardiner (ed.), The Advent of Steam: The Merchant Steamship Before 1900 (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1993), 127–135. Synarellis Maria, ‘Το οδικό δίκτυο’ [The Road Network] in Panayotopoulos (ed.), Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού, vol. 4, 119–30. The Year-book of Facts in Science and Art (London: Lockwood & Co, 1862). Ville Simon, ‘The Transition to Iron and Steel Construction’ in Robert Gardiner (ed.), Sail’s Last Century: The Merchant Sailing Ship, 1830–1930 (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1995), 52–73. Ville Simon, ‘Introduction’ in Simon Ville (ed.), Shipbuilding in the United Kingdom in the 19th Century: A Regional Approach (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 1993), 1–44. Walker Fred M., Ships and Shipbuilders: Pioneers of Design and Construction (Barnsley: Seaforth Publishing, 2010).

The Advent of Steam Navigation in Greece

231

Walker Fred M., Song of the Clyde: A History of Clyde Shipbuilding (Sparkford: Patrick Stephens Limited, 1984). Xenos Stefanos, Depredations: Overend, Gurney, & Co., and the Greek & Oriental Steam Navigation Company (London: The Author, 1869). Αναχωρήσεις της Ελληνικής Ατμοπλοίας εκ Πειραιώς [Departures of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company] Εν Αθήναις εκ του τυπογραφείου του Ανδρέου Κορομηλά, 1882. Κανονισμός της Υπηρεσίας των Ελληνικών Ατμοπλοίων [Regulation of the Greek Steamers ’ Service] (Athens, 1856).

Chapter 10

The Introduction of Maritime Technology in Greek Fisheries: Diving Suites in Sponge Fishing in the Aegean Evdokia Olympitou 1

Editors’ Note

Fishing, an economic activity inextricably related to the sea and the maritime economy, remains to the present day surprisingly under-researched in the Greek maritime historiography.1 Therefore, it is impossible to provide an estimate of the scale of the activity and its economy-wide effects. Nevertheless, fishing in the maritime communities of the Aegean and the Ionian Islands is intuitively intertwined with shipping, as these two economic sectors were complementary and shared maritime labour, particularly in the pre-industrial era, due to the seasonality of seaborne trade and navigation. In effect, fishing acted as the cradle for the maritime labour force across the islands and coastal towns. The evolution of fishing techniques, fishing vessels, fish farming and fishing rights, as well as the legal and institutional framework for fishing, is an issue that remains to be further addressed. 2

Introduction

From the last two decades of the nineteenth century until the interwar period, Greek sponge diving changed profile, as the demand for sponges rose and the technology behind it was modernised. In fact, the introduction and establishment of a mechanical diving method, of the so-called ‘skafandro’, intensified the production, while at the same time evoking a range of social and economic changes in the sponge-diving populations of the Aegean. 1 Dimitris Dimitropoulos and Evdokia Olympitou (eds), Ψαρεύοντας στις ελληνικές θάλασσες. Από τις μαρτυρίες του παρελθόντος στη σύγχρονη πραγματικότητα [Fishing in the Greek Seas: From Historical Testimonies to Contemporary Realities], Τετράδια Εργασίας [Research Notebooks], vol. 33 (Athens: Institute of Historical Research/NHRF, 2010); Maia Fourt, Daniel Faget and Thierry Perez, ‘Fighting the Minotaur: Resistance to Technological Change in the Mediterranean Sponge Fishing Industry (1840–1922), International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 337–53. © Evdokia Olympitou, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_011

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

3

233

The Sponge-Diving Issue During the year of 1868, that is in the beginning of the establishment of the damned diving helmets in sponge diving, our island, despite the fact that at the time sponges did not even cost one fourth of the price they have today, they […] were always plenty and inexhaustible in all the Ottoman coastline of the Mediterranean even in the minimal depths of the seas, it had an important income with relatively minimal expenses on sponge diving and almost without any risk for the life or the health of the sponge divers, and the whole place prospered, because all the working people of the island from the age of fifteen to the age of seventy worked quite profitably and comfortably in the sponge-diving business, the sponge-diving ships and the population of our island was growing, and by all means the sponge diving was, for our island and the rest of the islands of the Ottoman Empire that were engaged with the same occupation, a source of prosperity and progress and a growing resource of significant direct and indirect benefits for the government.2

The above report briefly describes the various dimensions of the spongediving activity, as it was traditionally practised in the islands of the southeastern Aegean. It is part of a lengthy report entitled General Statistics of the State of the Sponge-diving Industry of Our Island, which was made and signed by the Elders of Kalymnos3 in May of 1901 and addressed to Mahir Bey, Kaymakam4 of the island. The mandate of George Kaplanoglou, Inspector of the General Administration of the Ottoman Public Debt in the Aegean, gives the Elders the opportunity to express in detail their views on the catastrophic consequences of the use of the diving helmet, which is characterised in the whole text as a ‘terrible’, ‘cursed’, ‘lethal’ device that is worse than the plague. In their effort to persuade the Ottoman administration of the bleak future awaiting their island, they present their 2 Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. 88, 1 May 1901, 4. 3 The island of Kalymnos belongs to the Dodecanese, a constellation of islands in the southeastern Aegean. While mainland Greece and the majority of the Aegean Islands became independent in 1832 following a prolonged revolutionary war (from 1821–9), Kalymnos remained part of the Ottoman Empire until 1912, when the Dodecanese came under Italian rule. The islands were finally annexed to Greece in the aftermath of the Second World War. During the Ottoman occupation, the island was tributary to the Sultan and was self-governed by a local council that was presided over by the Elders. The council was elected on a yearly basis by the local population. The Elders assumed fiscal, judicial and administrative responsibilities on the island. 4 Kaymakam was a military and political degree that can be generally translated as sub-governor. While Kaymakamia was the local administration.

234

Olympitou

arguments around two main axes: the welfare of the population and the tax revenues collected by the state. In the Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, reports, letters, resolutions and memoranda of similar content are preserved, all requesting the abolition of the diving helmet. Reading these texts, one can end up with the reasonable conclusion that the society of Kalymnos, and that of the other sponge-diving islands, were upset over the last decades of the nineteenth century by the ‘sponge-diving issue’, as it was mentioned in the documents. We will deal with this ‘diving issue’ in the following text. The available sources allow us to study only to a degree its actual dimensions, as texts openly serve a mutual purpose. It seems that the opposite view is totally absent, namely the voices of those who understood the need for modernisation and the benefits that would arise from it, or even the silence of those who were struggling to adapt to the new situation. It seems, though, that the voice of protest was louder than the silence of those who already counted the profits in their ledgers and expanded their business abroad. We choose to stand by this side for one more reason: through the authors’ arguments in the documents, the protests that they express, the tensions and conflicts they imply, an issue has come forward that is particularly well known to other areas in the field of pre-industrial techniques: the introduction of a new technology. If, actually, the history of the technique is ‘the history of its changes’, we will carefully have to follow the pace of these changes to understand the ways in which technical innovations are introduced and adopted by each professional group, the inactivity and resistance encountered upon adjustment and the general changes that were evoked.5 The changes refer primarily to economic and social life, but to ideologies, collective perceptions and attitudes as well. The reasonable question arising here concerns the adaptation rate of those who introduce a technique in a new reality; those who usually take the spread of a new technology to be a threat. The fact that, undoubtedly, every innovation introduces the professional group to an adventure affects all involved in the production process and invites them to come to terms with it in order to survive.6 5 See Christina Agriantoni, ‘Προς την βιομηχανική τεχνολογία: οι συντεταγμένες της μεγάλης τομής’ [Towards Industrial Technology: The Coordinates of Great Change], in Ιστορία της νεοελληνικής τεχνολογίας – Τριήμερο εργασίας, Πάτρα, 21–23 Οκτωβρίου 1988 [History of Neohellenic Technology – Records of the Three-day Working Meeting, Patras, 21–23 October 1988] (Athens, 1991), 219. 6 According to Francois Russo, there are specific preconditions and factors which a society needs to have in order to accept an innovative technique: see Francois Russo, Εισαγωγή στην ιστορία των τεχνικών [Introduction to the History of Techniques] (Athens: Etva Cultural Technological Institute, 1993), 235–45.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

235

However, between the common activity of a professional group and its social organisation, a system of interactions is developed which highlights the cohesive role played by the technique for specific groups in space and time.7 The introduction of innovations, especially when they are ‘violent’, disturb the established conditions and totally remodel the internal balances. Labour relations, production activities, hierarchical organisation and the labour market are redefined, challenging the existing social cohesion. Sponge diving is for many reasons a privileged field for studying the consequences of the phenomenon, as it is adopted by populations with no other production capabilities who are ‘doomed’ to migrate for a long time, literally seeking their own resources on the sea bed. But mainly the survival of the divers and their work performance are interwoven with personal skills and risks, no matter how improved the diving means are. This inherent particularity ultimately turns sponge diving into an activity with limited possibilities of modernisation and mechanisation. However, especially in the case of the sponge diving of Kalymnos, it seems that a number of factors and coincidences meet and favour its development. For more than a century, sponge diving managed to find its way to productivity, to be linked to a net of international markets, to sustain robust sponge-trading houses abroad, to retain its human capital and to attract others from the surrounding islands of the Aegean Sea, to deal successfully with crisis and even to create colonies of sponge divers in Tunisia or the coasts of Florida, and finally to respond to social, economic and technological transformations. But most importantly, the island acquired an exclusive expertise in sponge diving that played a major role in its social structure and physiognomy and the formation of a material culture, which we could roughly call the ‘sponge civilisation’. The geographical area where the sponge-diving populations of the Aegean Islands lived and worked was located, at least until the early twentieth century, mainly in the Eastern Mediterranean: the coastal areas of Greece, Syria, Libya and Tunisia.8 Sponge diving, a primary productive activity, demands the 7 Andre Leroi-Gourhan, Evolution et techniques. I. L’homme et la matiere (Paris: Albin Michel, 1971), 9. Pierre Lemonnier, ‘Technologie ou Anthropologie des Techniques?’ in The Agricultural World in The Mediterranean Area, Records of the Greek-French Meeting (Athens, 1988), 334–7. 8 During the period examined in this text, the problems that would arise later from the restrictions and prohibitions in sponge-diving areas of North Africa had not yet been addressed. Analytically, see Sotirios Agapitidis, ‘Η οικονομική δομή των σπογγαλιευτικών ομάδων – κυρίως στη Σύμη’ [The Financial Structure of the Sponge-diving Groups – Especially in the Aegean Island of Symi], Τα συμιακά [Ta symiaka] 3 (1977), 181.

236

Olympitou

processing of the catch before it becomes available to the markets. However, it is entirely dependent on the Central and Western European markets. Chronologically speaking, we could trace its peak to this very period we refer to: the last decades of the nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth century, when the general circumstances were in favour of sponge exports for industrial use. Besides, it was at that time that this seasonal activity changed into organised business. This was the result of the introduction of the first diving device, which responded to a new situation and raised a number of changes and chain reactions in a professional area that until then had experienced only ‘archaic’ diving methods. 4

The Traditional Method of Sponge Diving The population of this island [Kalymnos] is entirely Greek and rises to 9,500 souls. However, before the Greek Revolution, a few Turks lived there, but since then, they have embraced Christianity. The population is growing, due to the ensured work in the area of sponge diving. There are no Europeans, no Consular officers, nor any trading houses. It is from this island, where Europe obtains the huge majority of sponge […] the sponge divers often load on their behalf, their goods, bound to England, France and Trieste.

This is the way the English Consul Niven Kerr describes the island of Kalymnos and its sponge-diving activity in his report to Stratford Cunning, Ambassador of England in Constantinople, in a report written on 16 June 1851.9 There were no suits or technical means in sponge diving at that time. The method used was ‘skin diving’.10 From various reports, as well as from later descriptions, we know of its basic characteristics. The crew of each ship consisted of four to six people, who dived to the bottom, passing on their left hand the so-called skandali, or skandalopetra, as it was called in Kalymnos. This was a chunky stone (often a polished piece of marble), weighing about fifteen kilos, tied with rope from the boat. Constantly holding the skandalopetra in order not to be swept by the currents, divers descended rapidly to the bottom. It is 9

10

Kyriakos Hatzidakis, ‘Κάλυμνος, 1851’ [The Island of Kalymnos, 1851], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 12 (1997), 38–44; see also Hatzidakis, ‘Η σπογγαλιεία στις νότιες Σποράδες στα μέσα του 19ου αιώνα’ [Sponge-diving in the Southern Sporades in the Midnineteenth Century], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymniaka Chronika] 13 (1999), 236. The free diving continued even after 1950, using the method of ‘cuff’. The difference is that the diver dives autonomously in uniform, with fins and bobs around his waist. The ship’s crew also consists in this case of the captain and four to five divers.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

237

mentioned that they would dive to great depths of up to forty fathoms, due to their practice from an early age. They remained there for about one or two minutes, and the fittest for three or four minutes – that is, as long as they could hold their breath for. A man from the boat was holding the end of the rope and was in constant contact with the diver, who, with a corresponding signal of pulling, informed him every time his breath was exhausted, in order to pull him up to the surface with the highest possible speed. Each diver could thereby make eight to ten dives per day.11 That was the method of diving used, with slight variations, in all the sponge-diving areas. According to a report of the English Consul in Rhodes, Robert Campbell, in 1858 Kalymnos possessed 254 out of the 600 sponge-diving ships of the southern Sporades with naked divers, and 2,000 sponge divers out of a total of 4,600.12 5

The Diving Helmet

The introduction in 1868 of the ‘sponge-machine’ or ‘machine’, as they call the diving helmet even today in Kalymnos, came to degrade the traditional expertise of the divers, because the competition between physical ability and skill and the mechanical support of the helmet would soon lean in favour of the diving helmet.13 The diving suit that protected the diver’s body and the respiratory 11

12 13

Especially vivid is the description of Charles Flegel, A. The Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Anthimos Z’ in Kalymnos (Samos, 1896), 15, and the description of Alexandros Lemonidis, Το εμπόριο της Τουρκίας [The Trade of Turkey] (Constantinople, 1849), 157. See also the description (from the early eighteenth century) of the English sightseer Aaron Hill about Symi sponge divers: Kyriakos Simopoulos, Ξένοι ταξιδιώτες στην Ελλάδα 1700–1800 [Foreign Travellers in Greece 1700–1800], vol 2 (Athens: Piroga Publications, 1995), 59–61. For modern portrayals of this method and its organisation, see Nikitas Haviaras, ‘Συμαίων γυμνών σπογγαλιέων φρικτά επεισόδια’ [Horrible Episodes of the Symian Naked Divers], Τα συμιακά [Of Symi Island] 3 (1977), 285–93; Agapitidis, ‘Η οικονομική δομή των σπογγαλιευτικών ομάδων’, 185; Nikolaos Pizanias, ‘Η οργάνωση των σπογγαλιευτικών εταιρειών (τεχνικώς-οικονομικώς)’ [Regulating Sponge-diving Businesses (Technically and Economically)], Πρακτικά του Πρώτου Σπογγαλιευτικού Συνεδρίου, Ρόδος 1952 [Proceedings of the First Sponge-diving Conference, Rhodes 1952], 28–30; Υπουργείον Ανοικοδομήσεως [Ministry of Reconstruction], vol. 1 (Athens, 1950), 136–7. Hatzidakis, ‘Η σπογγαλιεία στις νότιες Σποράδες’, 231. Possibly an older invention, the diving helmet improved greatly in the first half of the nineteenth century through English and French manufacturers. It is characteristic that such uniforms and devices were used by the Nautilus crew to explore the bottom of the sea, while Jules Verne had already imagined since 1869 the use of metal oxygen bottles, which would allow the diver to move autonomously: Jules Verne, 20.000 λεύγες κάτω από την θάλασσα [Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea] (Athens, 2018), 118–19 (Greek translation). Charles Flegel reports that the diving helmet in the Dodecanese was introduced in the mid-1860s by the French merchant Auble; see Charles Flegel, ‘The Dodecanese or

238

Olympitou

system that gave him oxygen allowed an increase in the depth and duration of each dive, multiplying his productive capacity.14 For the same reason, the diver’s working period was expanded from the three months that naked divers originally worked in, to seven months or even more for those who wore the diving suit and could submerge in cold autumn or winter waters.15 Although the ‘mechanisation’ of sponge diving would have been completed by the end of the decade of 1920, when the boats of Kalymnos were becoming motorised, the productive potential that the diving helmet created led to new demands. The crew grew larger (reaching even thirty or fifty men), the working capital increased and the cost of equipment and ship supplies became larger too. Of course, profits were also multiplied, especially for those who were able to invest significant capital, but also for the diving ‘engineers’. The result is that the prevalence of deep-sea sponge diving would lead to a gradual prevalence of the rate system in cash or goods on sponges. This was a way of paying with large ratings, depending on the capacity and the efficiency of the diver.16 Thus, the professional competition became stronger, especially against those who practised sponge diving the traditional way.

14

15

16

Southern Sporades from a Memorandum of the Beginning of the Century’, Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymniaka Chronika] 12 (1997), 63. The diver, the ‘engineer’, now wore a waterproof full-body uniform, ‘the machine dress’, heavy metal shoes and lead bullets weighing around fifteen kilos. On his head, he had a metallic helmet fixed to a brass chest and tightly fitted into his suit. On the front, there was a glass window in order to see, while with a pipe (the so-called markutso) he was able to breathe. When submerged, two people gave him oxygen, turning the pump, or ‘wheel’, continuously, another member of the crew was looking at the time, while the ‘kolauzieris’ watched the diving from the ship and was tied with a rope to the diver. The manual air pump that the ‘wheel turners’ were moving was later replaced by a mechanical one that automatically supplied the driver with oxygen. For this subject, see Evdokia Olimpitou’s paper, ‘Planning the Journey: Sponge-diving Contracts and Employment Relationships of the Crew in Kalymnos, 19th–20th Cen.’, to be published in the Proceedings of the Second European Conference of Modern Greek Studies on ‘Greek Islands from the Frankish Occupation Until Today’. This is about the kopelli (‘young boy’) system that would dominate for the next two decades. Law n.560 of 1937 had already defined two different rates of payment for depths less than or over eighteen fathoms. The issue was under question throughout this period by the unions of divers and sponge divers. See, characteristically, Πρακτικά του Πρώτου Σπογγαλιευτικού Συνεδρίου, Ρόδος 1952, especially the introduction of Andreas Kirkilitsis on ‘Σπογγαλιεία, πίστη και χρηματοδότηση’ [The Sponge-diving Faith and Finance], 75–76.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

6

239

The Changes

We could say that with the establishment of the diving helmet, sponge diving became a distinctive professional activity of the populations of the islands, with the increasing length of the work season, the intensifying work imposed, the specialisation and division implied, the rising of wages and the transition from the family or cooperative organisation of work to work in the business. Limited financial investment gave way to a wider circle of financial transactions and credits. Significant sums of money were invested in the sponge-diving groups using the diving helmet. It was no longer easy for a large number of inhabitants, using simple means, to practise the job of the sponge diver aside other occupations to strengthen their family income. The disappearance of sponges from shallow depths and the need to travel further in search of richer sponge areas deterministically leads to the dilemma: abandonment of the activity or adoption of the new diving system? Notwithstanding, both options implied risks for crews that did not fully adapt to the new technical knowledge. The opponents of the new technology considered that the diving helmet threatened the life and health of those who used it. They supported the idea that maybe the divers had escaped the danger of the sharks and the ‘worm of the sponges’,17 but that other unknown dangers expected them in greater depths. It seems that paraplegia and the deaths of the mechanical divers preoccupied the scientists of the time.18 The doctor Anakreon Stamatiadis, Sanitation Director in Samos, seemed to know, in 1901, the causes and symptoms of the ‘divers’ disease’: ‘the poisoning of oxygen, the high pressure, the 17

18

This is the ‘disease of the naked sponge divers’ or ‘the Skevos Zervos disease’, from the name of the Kalymnian doctor who was the first to study the symptoms, causes and treatment of the disease. It is caused by a microorganism that lives in the roots of the sponges and secretes a salivary fluid which creates severe eczema, wounds and purulent abscesses on the naked body of the diver. He points out that there is not a diver, who has no scars from the disease, especially on the chest and the arms. It is characteristic, as noted, that he announces his comments in 1903, when he is concerned that the victims will increase due to the diving helmet prohibition; see Skevos Zervos, ‘Η νόσος των γυμνών σπογγαλιέων’ [The Disease of the Naked Sponge-divers], Announcement in the Second National Medical Congress (Athens: n.p., 1903); Skevos Zervos, Les anemones de la mer dans la pathologia de l’homme (Paris: Masson, 1937). See, for instance, the bibliography on the divers’ disease, which refers to the Great Greek Encyclopedia and covers the period 1881–1912; especially, see I. Tetsis, L’ile d’Hydra et les maladies der plongeurs (Paris, 1881), who classifies the manifestation of the disease into four levels: transient congestion of the brain, paraplegia, bleeding, which will possibly lead to death, and comatose state, which always leads to death: Μεγάλη Ελληνική Εγκυκλοπαίδεια [Great Greek Encyclopedia], vol. 1 (Athens: Pyrsos, 1926), 671–2, entry ‘aeraimia’.

240

Olympitou

rapid decompression, are causes leading to deafness and loss of balance, due to cerebral hemorrhage, convulsions, paraplegia and multiple bleeding. These are some of the symptoms that the malpractice of the diving helmet causes’.19 Charles Flegel had already described the disease in an equivalent manner in 1896: ‘The water pressure in depths from twenty-five to forty fathoms is so high, that when staying longer, the blood is pushed from the lower parts of the body upwards, to the heart and the head, and therefore in time paralysis of limbs and sudden death may appear’.20 Yet, the victims are not systematically recorded by the Elders, so we only know the exact extent of the problem indirectly:21 The sponge divers wearing the diving helmets are mercilessly killed by these damned tools or become totally paralysed and unnecessary earth burdens […] an average of 15% per year and from year to year this terrible mortality and paralysis of the divers increases, as the scientific regulations of the helmet do not permit them to descend to depths over thirty-five French metres, nevertheless, because the sponges are almost exhausted in moderate depths, the mechanical divers were forced to work already systematically in depths from sixty metres to seventy metres, thus sponge-diving faces the danger of being completely destroyed by the Ottoman State.22 The debate over fatal accidents becomes dominant, while very soon it will acquire one more dimension, which will feed the contrasts between divers and captains. The latter, as head of the sponge-diving local business, were usually

19 20 21

22

It is published in Charles Flegel, La question des pecheurs d’eponges de la Mediterranee (Cairo: Imprimerie du Guvernement, 1902), 10. Charles Flegel, The Island of Kalymnos (Constantinople: n.p., 1896), 30–31. K. Hatzidakis states that in the sponge-diving islands, from 1866 to 1915, 10,000 deaths and 20,000 instances of paralysis occurred in cases where a diving helmet was used, while in the same period when diving naked only ten victims were mentioned, information apparently derived from Charles Flegel’s text. In 1896, Charles Flegel wrote that the victims of the diving helmet, during its thirty years of use in the sponge diving in Kalymnos, rose to at least 800 dead men and another 200 men with heavy paralysis, while almost all the divers were slightly paralysed; see Flegel, The Holiness, 17, and Kyriakos Hatzidakis, ‘Ο αγώνας για την κατάργηση του καταδυτικού σκάφανδρου και ο Κάρολο Flegel’ [The Struggle to Abolish the Diving Helmets and Charles Flegel], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymniaka Chronika] 3 (1982), 32. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. 1, May 1901, 7–8.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

241

the owners of mechanical equipment and the sponge-fishing boats.23 However, the equipment of the boats using diving helmets, and the large deposits to the divers, presupposed the investment of significant capital, which would depreciate upon the sale of the sponges to the traders. The funding of the sponge-diving groups was undertaken by some wealthy people from Kalymnos (usually traders), who lent the required capital to captains with high interest rates and warranties. In this way, a short-lived business scheme was set up, whose success depended on human labour and skill. For the captains – that is, the intermediaries between sponsors (‘initiators’ as mentioned in documents of the time) – and the crews, the sponge-diving business was usually highly profitable. However, the business risk involved in such an investment in human labour and the potential high profits forced them to put pressure on the crew and especially on divers, mainly in terms of the depth, the duration and the number of dives they would perform. Let us focus on the information and the perceptions that are unveiled in the Elders’ report of Kalymnos, where the arguments against the use of diving helmets are stronger and clearer than those stated in earlier similar documents. The report is based on data obtained from the official annual signed books of the Elders and are confirmed by the relevant books of the Board of Health and of the Kaymakamia, which received directly the taxation of the annual licences of the sponge-diving boats up to 1887. From 1888 onwards – until at least 1901, when the report was written – this tax was collected by the Office of Public Debt of the Ottoman Empire, which was based in Kalymnos. In the table accompanying the report, the starting year of the registration was 1865, with 352 fishing licences for naked divers.24 Until 1869, when the sponge diving of Kalymnos began to employ the diving helmet, a few years after its introduction in Symi,25 the number of boats using skin diving displayed a slightly 23 24

25

Some of them, as we know from recent sources and oral testimonies, were divers themselves. ‘Antikarides’ were the captains that did not dive, but led the boat throughout the journey. The table reported here varies slightly from other tables accompanying the Elders’ letter to their delegate in Constantinople, Hippocrates Tavlarios (Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. 99, 10 May 1901). The second group of tables, which has been compiled by the Office of Public Debt (based in Rhodes), refers to the period between 1888 and 1900 and presents separately the boats of the rest of the Ottoman areas and those coming from Greek areas (the islands of Hydra, Aegina, etc.) in order to get a fishing licence. The small arithmetic differences between the studied table and the other groups of tables, as well as the letters which try to explain those differences, are a separate issue that is not addressed in this article. Especially since they do not alter the general conclusions. In respect to the year of the diving helmet’s introduction in Symi, many different opinions have been expressed. Kyriakos Hatzidakis mentions that this took place in 1863,

242

Olympitou

rising trend (368 boats in 1868). However, the three boats using the diving helmet in 1869 immediately grew to eighteen in the next year, while at the same time the other kind were reduced to 340 boats. By observing the parallel course of the methods of diving, it is obvious that skin diving descended slowly but steadily, until 1900 when only eight licences were granted. Throughout this period, we observe only one exception: in 1885 165 licences were issued for boats with naked divers, compared to 129 licences in the previous year and 100 in the following year. This temporary pause in the declining progress of the traditional methods is ascribed by the Elders to another unexpected parameter: ‘During the year of 1885 [was] the supposed discovery of a large sponge-diving opportunity in Zohar (the coast of Tripolite Muscovy), where many new ships flocked, but [this] proved to be almost fantasy’.26 It was the ‘year of the Zohar’ according to other contemporary sources, characterising it as a landmark for the destruction of the sponge-diving fleet of small boats.27 In contrast, the licences of the boats using skafandra increased, but there were significant fluctuations. What is the cause of those fluctuations? One could roughly say that they are linked to the reactions, the temporary restrictions and prohibitions, and the overall climate, which sometimes promoted or restricted the smooth functioning of sponge diving in the area. They are also linked with the export potential and consumption of annual production. Despite the individual fluctuations, the average boats using diving helmets that got a licence within those thirty years (1871–1900) remained high, with an annual average of thirty-seven boats. There were a few years with high numbers of licences – for example, sixty-two in 1878 and fifty-six in 1879 – while there were some years with low numbers, for example 1886 and 1900, with just twenty licences. However, during the years where the number of boats using diving helmets was reduced, there was not a corresponding increase in the number of fishing licences using other methods.

26 27

while other scholars say shortly afterwards. Sotirios Agapitidis writes that the diving helmet appeared in the sponge-fishing area in 1883, introduced by the Symian diver Fotis Mastoridis. See Hatzidakis, ‘Ο αγώνας για την κατάργηση του καταδυτικού σκάφανδρου’, 38; Bernard Russell, ‘Kalymnian Sponge Diving’, Human Biology 39/2 (1967), 113, and Agapitidis, ‘Η οικονομική δομή των σπογγαλιευτικών ομάδων’, 185. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. 88, 1 May 1901. G. Gerakis explains how the destruction occurred. All generated from some Kalymnian sponge divers, who overestimated last year the marine wealth of this area and lured a lot of others to man latinia (‘ships’) and boats and ‘to march with more ships than ever, seeking for a shoal full of sponges, where they didn’t find the expected treasure’: Giannis Gerakis, Σφουγγαράδικες ιστορίες: από την Κάλυμνο του 1900 [Sponge-diving Stories from the Island of Kalymnos of 1900] (Athens, 1999), 37–39.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

243

The report does not show the total number of persons engaged in sponge diving, nor the number of those participating in each method separately. By studying the detailed ledgers of 1884 – which was chosen because the ‘Maritime Sponge-diving Regulation’ was written at that time – we know the exact number of men working in sponge-diving boats at that year: 6,201 men.28 In this ledger, 167 sponge-diving departure licences from the island of Kalymnos are recorded in detail and coincide with those listed in the Elders’ report. It is a thorough record of the crew of each boat – with the captain’s name first and then all the names of the crew – but there is no mention of their specific occupations.29 Having a view of men usually participating in the two different types of diving, we notice that there are twenty-one boats with a crew of ten members and more, and the number of men is 297. Even if we assume that in the boats with a smaller crew the diving helmet is used, to account for the difference of seventeen additional boats that are listed in the report, the number of those employed in this method of diving is significantly lower than those following the traditional method.30 In 1885, for the first time in the available archival records, boats appear using harpoons.31 Although we do not know exactly when this method of fishing sponges began, it seems that from 1885 until 1900 the abovementioned method is followed by an average of around fifty boats per year, with a marked increase from 1894 onwards.32 Even if we attribute their rising trend to the parallel abandonment of skin diving, we understand that sponge diving with the harpoon method could not compete with the performance of diving with a helmet. This is also the case with the so-called gkagkava.33 Boats using this method appear 28 29 30 31

32

33

Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, ledger 29/1881–7 August 1884. The study of the agreement signed that year would allow us to at least detect who the diving ‘engineers’ are. But this is something that goes beyond the aim of this article. Thirty-six boats are noted in the ledger, with a total crew of nine members. We assume that some of them use the diving helmet method, while others use the skin-diving method. The harpoon used in this method of fishing rests on a pole that is ten metres or longer. Harvesting is usually done from the boat, after the sponges have been identified with a glass. Sometimes the divers using harpoons dive to the bottom to catch sponges; see Agapitidis, ‘Η οικονομική δομή των σπογγαλιευτικών ομάδων’, 184. Hatzidakis mentions that the boats using harpoons (kamakadika) have been used in the island since 1891. But he rather has in his mind the same archival source; see Hatzidakis, ‘Η Κάλυμνος στα τέλη της τουρκοκρατίας’ [Kalymnos at the End of the Ottoman Rule], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά 8 (1989), 83. The method of sponge-diving presupposes boats of five to ten tons. They use large net bags, with stitched rims in a rectangular iron frame. These bags are dragged to the bottom and remove sponges located at great depths. See, indicatively, Nikolaos Pizanias, Η Κάλυμνος, με βάση τους όρους παραγωγής πλούτου, τους δημογραφικούς, και ιδιαίτερα τους δημοσιονομικούς

244

Olympitou

for the first time in 1891, albeit in characteristically small numbers. It seems that fishing methods that do not require diving absorb some of the traditional crews, which operate in these ways in order to circumvent the new technology. The total number of sponge-fishing boats, for the thirty-five years indicated in the report, follows a steady downward trend, reaching no more than 150 boats during the last decade of the nineteenth century. Maybe this explains the arguments of the Elders concerning the decrease in the numbers of those occupied with sponge fishing, taking into consideration the gradual disappearance of sponges in shallow waters, where the naked divers could dive. Migration, on the other hand, appears as the only solution to the impasse of the sponge-diving populations. The trade centres of the Greek diaspora – and, slightly later, the transatlantic destinations – would absorb those who could no longer live on sponge fishing, as noted in a relevant report by the Elders.34 Because of this sad and desperate situation of the sponge diving, only a fifth of its labour population can find a poor job in this industry; the rest is left without work, because our island is rocky and barren and has no other occupation except for sponge diving; out of necessity they began to migrate abroad to find a livelihood, and over three thousand Kalymnians have migrated gradually to different places abroad, especially in Russia, and if the situation continues, our island will shortly become almost deserted. On the contrary, through the abolition of the diving helmets, as demonstrated in detail with respect to the High Imperial Government, within two or three years at the most, sponges would gradually be multiplied and increased in

34

όρους [Kalymnos as Seen in Wealth Producing, Demographic, and Particularly in Budgetary Terms] (Athens, 1935), 26; Agapitidis, ‘Η οικονομική δομή των σπογγαλιευτικών ομάδων’, 184; Υπουργείον Ανοικοδομήσεως, 139–40. For the immigration of children aged twelve to fifteen/sixteen from about 1900 to 1914, towards Odessa, Kiev, St Petersburg, Warsaw, etc. in order to work in various factories and industries, see Gerakis, Σφουγγαράδικες ιστορίες: από την Κάλυμνο [Sponge-diving Stories from the Island of Kalymnos], 37–40. The author, in this autobiographical text, recounts his voyage from Kalymnos to Russia via Smyrna, refers to the two-year stay in St Petersburg (1900–1902) and to his work in a slipper factory, where the Kalymnians  – especially children  – were employed. He also believes that the migration of children was due to the prevalence of diving helmets and the poverty it had caused to the families of the naked divers. Besides, around 1905 the first migration of Kalymnians to Tarpon Springs in Florida took place; see Antonis Mailis, ‘Στο Τάρπον Σπρινγκσ’ [In Tarpon Springs], Η Καθημερινή. Επτά Ημέρες [Ι Kathimerini. Epta Imeres] 13 (Athens, 1996), 37–38.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

245

these places and would always remain abundant and inexhaustible through natural sponge diving.35 In a letter sent by the Elders on 10 May 190136 to Heppocrates Tavlarios, the delegate of Kalymnos to Constantinople,37 another relevant argument is raised: the islands of Samos, Crete and Cyprus have already banned the use of diving helmet, resulting in attracting many sponge-diving boats to their seas, with naked divers from other islands.38 It was estimated that Crete and Cyprus, which have, as stated in the document, a coastline of over 360 miles rich in sponges, would absorb most of the sponge-diving activity of the Aegean. In the abovementioned letter an interesting question is stated: “Why, then, should the Kalymnian sponge divers stay on these dry rocks and starve, and not migrate to the coasts of Crete or Cyprus, where they will fish abundant sponges without expenses?” […] “Already since last year, many sponge-fishing families of our island intended to emigrate and settle on the coast of Crete, and were restrained only by the repeated assurances of Your Excellency and of our Revered Kaymakam about the paternal concern of the High Imperial Government, that very soon, following our mutual desires, they will solve this issue.”39 Although questions arise and the possible answers would need a more systematic study of the total figures  – at least those saved in the Elders’ Archives – in the paper we focus on the passage of sponge diving from ‘traditional practices’ to ‘modernity’. What the abovementioned report shows us is that despite the constant and strong reaction, this transformation was not 35 36

37 38 39

Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. 88, 1 May 1901. With this letter, they inform him that the inspector of the Office of Ottoman Public Debt in the Aegean Sea had visited the islands of Kalymnos, Leros and Symi. ‘This gentleman is Greek and his name is Kaplanoglou, a young man who seemed to be very polite and nice and well educated. Upon arriving here, he warmly pleaded with us, through our known citizen Leonidas Shinas, employee here of the Office of Public Debt, to provide him with an official statistic of the annual sponge-diving of our island, from the eve of the application of the diving helmet until 1888, when the collection of sponge-fishing taxes was received by the Direction of the Ottoman Public Debt’: Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. 99, 10 May 1901. For biographical information on Hippocrates Tavlarios, see Νέο Εγκυκλοπαιδικό Λεξικό [New Encyclopedic Dictionary], vol. 17 (Athens), 596; see also Flegel, The Island of Kalymnos, 44. Charles Flegel believes that the abolition of the diving helmet would have a very positive impact on these islands, especially regarding the increase in revenues from taxation of the diving boats; see Flegel, La question, 21. For the same reason it seems that most of the sponge-fishing boats with naked divers from Kalymnos preferred Crete as a fishing location during the period from 1902 to 1905, when the use of diving helmets was temporarily banned; see Gerakis, Σφουγγαράδικες ιστορίες: από την Κάλυμνο, 85.

246

Olympitou

rebutted. Despite the fact that for a period of thirty years the two diving methods coexisted, the result was the descending of the traditional method and the rising dominance of the diving helmet. 7

‘The Big Issues Need Great Patience’40

In 1884, the need for institutional organisation of labour relations and transactions in sponge diving led the Elders of Kalymnos to compile the ‘Navy Sponge-diving Regulation’, which also includes the ‘Regulation of the Sponge-diving Machines’, which was passed by the 485 members of the popular assembly of the island.41 The regulation, with its forty-three articles, systematised the business organisation and sorted out the rules, the rights, the duties and the rewards of the involved agents. It seems that at that time there was pressure from the increasing number of victims of the divers’ disease that the ‘Navy Sponge-diving Regulation’ included in its articles special arrangements for victims in case of accidents.42 It is reported that the reactions against the use of the diving helmet began in 1875, a few years after its introduction to Kalymnos, while the ban was achieved in 1881.43 The measure lasted until 1885 when, after many infractions, it was finally withdrawn. Thanks to various sources regarding the abovementioned period, we know that in the islands of Kalymnos and Symi there were many

40 41 42

43

Phrase taken from the letter of the Elders of Kalymnos sent to Tavlarios, delegate of the island to Constantinople: Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. No. 99, 10 May 1901. Elders of Kalymnos, ‘Ναυτικός Σπογγαλιευτικός Κανονισμός’ [Navy Sponge-diving Regulation], Kαλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymniaka Chronika] 5 (1985), 178–95. The compensations were given only when the captain of the vessel was considered to be responsible for the accident. Otherwise, the event was either seen as accidental or attributed to the carelessness and greed of the diver, who descended to great depths for long periods in order to harvest more sponges; see Gerakis, Σφουγγαράδικες ιστορίες: από την Κάλυμνο, 39–42. Later, in 1937 (Act No. 560, which regulates sponge-diving issues), some provisions were included that referred to the care and compensation of the victims and their families. Despite the deficiencies of the law, its application in Dodecanese takes place after 1948; see Πρακτικά του Πρώτου Σπογγαλιευτικού Συνεδρίου, 81–85. Furthermore, during the early postwar years, when the divers of the Dodecanese jointed the Merchant Seamen’s Fund, they were not considered as seamen but as sea-labourers lacking the right of hospitalisation and disability pensions after an accident; Πρακτικά του Πρώτου Σπογγαλιευτικού Συνεδρίου, 85. Heppocrates Fragopoulos, Ιστορία της Καλύμνου [History of Kalymnos] (Athens: Skafandro, 1995), 104–6.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

247

reactions, while in some cases violent protests and riots manifested.44 Let us follow some characteristic records from the last decades of the nineteenth century. The first of these is a resolution of 2 November 1893. According to the document, the populations and the Elders of Kalymnos were asking for the abolition of the diving helmet.45 A few months later, on 5 May 1894, we read: ‘The people of the island of Kalymnos, conscious of the destruction that the sponge-diving machines brought to sponge diving, which was their only resource of living, reached such a point that life can no longer be sustained, unless they destroy the machines rapidly.’ As a result, the people of Kalymnos drew up a memorandum for the Sultan and appointed special representatives – Miltiadis Karavokiros and Nikolaos Kalavros – who would convey the request of the inhabitants of the island to Constantinople.46 In some cases the reactions took on a more organised form that was aggressive towards the Elders, who were considered responsible for not resolving the issue. Thus, on 29 May 1895, in a letter to the Kaymakam of Kalymnos, Hilmi Bey, the Elders of Kalymnos asked necessary measures to be taken in order to guarantee the peace of the inhabitants, since – as they stated – he was very well aware of the perpetrators of the incidents. According to the Elders: Last Sunday, a few people here, very well known to the Administration’s Police and the respected Kaymakam, went to the town [Chora]. After ringing the bells of the Cathedral of Our Lady, they assembled some of the inhabitants of the town, and after deceiving and agitating them with various lies and slanders, stating that the Elders apparently don’t want the abolition of the sponge-diving machines and that they refuse to do what it takes to achieve the success of this issue, and even more lies and slanders – while the Elders instead are able to prove in all cases and by formal ways that they act with all the required zeal and activity in order to satisfy the desire of the inhabitants – they set out, along with women and children, to go to the port of Pothia. And along the road from Chora to Pothia they set up piles of stones at a place so they could throw them 44

45 46

In addition to what occurred in Symi, Michael Grigoropoulos states that the sponge divers of Kalymnos destroyed many diving machines belonging to France. For this reason, French warships sailed in the area to protect the interests of their investing citizens; see Michael Grigoropoulos, The Island of Symi, Dissertation on a Geographical, Historical and Statistical Perspective (Athens: n.p., 1877), 57. Fragopoulos, Ιστορία της Καλύμνου, 104–6. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, Book 23, doc. 11. Charles Flegel also refers to this information and publishes a part of the statement he drew up in 1894; see Flegel, The Island of Kalymnos, 31–33 and The Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch, 19–21.

248

Olympitou

at us, as if we were allegedly terrible enemies of the country, and they hurled at us ceaselessly the most scurrilous invectives and threats. Then they entered the city with stones in hands. And when they gathered at the church of Christ without the Elders or the Respected Kaymakamia knowing, after they had rung the bell of the church, a few more assembled, and after the organisers repeated slanders against us, they continued to insult and threaten us and then they went to the Government House. We were then informed that they had sent a delegation, as Your Excellency didn’t accept them en masse, and later they left again and wandered around the city, continuing to slander, insult and threaten us.47 The available data do not allow us to determine how often such violent mobilisations took place and what the goal was each time, or the true role of the Elders, who obviously received pressure from both sides. But similar mobilisations are recorded in a rhyming chronicle, entitled ‘Winter Dream’, issued at the same time in Boston by a Symian teacher, Metrophanes Kalafatas. There is a description in it of the furious reaction of the people of Symi against the machines: And the people’s belief was not against, nor in any way scoundrel and outrage The purpose was to break the machines to replace them, not to buy others.48 The Russian professor Charles Flegel sides with the struggle for the abolition of the skafandro. He settled in Kalymnos and started an ardent crusade with reports, pleadings, articles in the international press and various other publications, in order to persuade the Mediterranean governments to seriously address the ‘sponge-diving’ issue.49 His arguments are similar to those already heard in the pleadings of the Elders: Since 1863, when the ‘skafandro’ was simultaneously introduced in both the Dodecanese and Greece, the evil descended en masse to the previously 47 48 49

The whole document is published by Kyriakos Hatzidakis, ‘Η Κάλυμνος στο τέλος της Τουρκοκρατίας’ [Kalymnos during the Last Years of the Turkish Occupation], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά 8 (1989), 86–87. Metrophanes Kalafatas, ‘Χειμερινό όνειρο’ [Winter Dream], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά 5 (1999), 270. His residence in Kalymnos and his life are described in Flegel, La question, 12–20. See also the relative homage in Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά 3 (1982), 25–54.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

249

happy sponge-diving populations; that is, premature and sudden deaths, and chronic diseases of the young and the men, with an analogous large number of widows and orphans lacking any income, unmarried daughters because of the shortage of men, lack of daily bread for many people due to the increasing exhaustion of the sponges in the bottom of the sea because of the diving helmets, beggary and immigration in Russia and America which was imposed by poverty; briefly, a hideous social disintegration […] That was the deplorable condition of the sponge-diving men of Kalymnos and the Mediterranean during the year of 1892.50 At that time, those who contributed variously to this struggle were honoured by the Elders and the islanders. Thus on 17 June 1902, by a referendum of the inhabitants, Flegel was nominated as ‘freeman’ of the island because of his reports and actions ‘for a favourable resolution of the sponge-diving issue, which is vital for the rest of the countries of the Mediterranean through the abolition of the homicidal and sponge-damaging diving helmets’.51 The same applied to Heppocrates Tavlarios, when they asked him once more to act for the abolition of the port authority and the diving helmets (resolutions of the Elders of 12 and 14 January 1900).52 He was also declared as a ‘great benefactor’ of the island with the resolution of 14 January 1903.53 All these honours were awarded after the abolition of the diving helmets in 1902.54 The aim had finally been achieved. It seems that the ban was then expected, because in the enrolment books of the crews using skafandra after 1900, it was very often stated that recruiting would apply only if ‘the machines [were] not obstructed’. One of the consequences is reflected in the fact that on 8 January 1903, the Elders decided to increase the city tax that was paid by the sponge-diving crews; that was because, due to ‘the abolition of the machines, the local right of the sponges [would] be reduced; consequently, the community budget [would] suffer some reduction.’55

50 51 52 53 54 55

This is a passage from the documents of Charles Flegel, which is published by Kyriakos Hadzidakis, ‘Kalymnos in the end of Turkish occupation’, 85. The document is accompanied by 185 signatures: Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, doc. 3. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, Book 23, doc. 19. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, Book 23, doc. 20; see also Fragopoulos, History of Kalymnos, 107. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, Book 23, doc. 20. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, Book 23, doc. 16.

250

Olympitou

Eventually, however, the abolition of the diving helmets was not implemented in Kalymnos.56 What is interesting to note is that in the enrolement book of the period 1904–5, several agreements of sponge divers using skafandro are included.57 Furthermore, on 27 September 1906: the sponge-diving population of the island of Kalymnos, when informed that the Respected Imperial Government chases and captures the spongediving boats that were using machines, and that in addition other neigh­ bouring islands have finally understood the results of this disastrous and destructive appliance and were aiming at its abolition as well, decided to organise a meeting in the council of Elders expressing their wish to take all necessary actions concerning this issue; … they authorised the Elders along with the Municipal Council to meet the local High Administration and present to the Governor the will of the people, which is in accordance with the resolution of the Revered Imperial Government, already issued a long time ago, concerning the abolition of the sponge-diving machinery in all Imperial Seas.58 It seems that despite all notes, resolutions, actions and organised opposition, and despite the decision of the Ottoman administration to ban diving helmets, it was now impossible for the sponge-diving populations to return to the traditional method of skandalopetra. According to John Zervos (in 1961): Every time that there was a partial and temporal cessation of the machines, economic and overpowering problems arose. There were charges, pursuits of the illegal use of the machines or of the work of captains, until the general use of the machines was restored again by unquestioned law. Our century was the century of the global prevalence of machines in all industries of human states and society. The so-called progress does not allow us to turn back to the natural or primitive way of exploitation of the feeding land and sea.59

56

57 58 59

It is stated that the ban was in force until 1905. For information on how the ban was addressed, and on the increase of the number of vessels and crews using the traditional diving method, see Gerakis, Σφουγγαράδικες ιστορίες: από την Κάλυμνο [Sponge-diving Stories from the Island of Kalymnos], 24, 83. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, Book 83, Enlistments in the Navy, 10 April 1904 until 1 April 1905. Elders’ Archive of Kalymnos, Book 23, resolution No. 18. Hatzidakis, ‘Ο αγώνας για την κατάργηση του καταδυτικού σκάφανδρου’, 38.

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

251

At the beginning of the twentieth century, Kalymnos with about 19,000 inhabitants,60 was an island with organised market and manufacturing workshops, which were directly or indirectly associated with the engagement of the population with the sponge-diving business: a human resource consisting of locals, but foreigners as well, with a number of small or bigger entrepreneurs, investors and traders, all working on ships. This new reality was now shaping the physiognomy of the island. Although the world of the skilled workmen  – in our case the world of sponge divers  – was never willing to embrace ‘industrialisation’, it was ultimately forced to adapt. Thus, the traditional sponge diving of Kalymnos, along with the so-called skafandro, would dominate in the following decades until its final decline. But at that time there is something else happening that is – in my opinion – equally important. The changes in the overall organisation of the sponge diving brought about by the skafandro, as well as the ‘blame’ that was attributed to it for the harsh working conditions, the inhuman living conditions on boats, the exploitation of divers by the captains, but mainly the increase in victims of the divers’ disease, all feed the collective memory with emotionally narrated stories, which revolve around the contrast between the involved groups, the gallantry of the divers and the relevance of their work to death. The divers and the ‘diving engineers’, a distinct social group in the small island society of Kalymnos, were good-looking men and free spirits, tireless not only at work but also in feasts, songs, games and dances; they impressed with their way of living and with their stylish habits: The costume of the divers, especially on holidays, is colourful and elegant, and it consists of an embroidered vest with creepers on the back over a snow-white shirt, of black or blue shiny pants, socks of different colours, black shoes, and depending on the time of year of a straw hat or a furry hood.61 Two more recent testimonies from people who have worked in sponge-diving boats since the 1930s confirm the special position of the divers in the local 60

61

Charles Flegel mentions that in Chora there are about 5,000 inhabitants, and there are 9,000 in Pothea (in the port), while a few are scattered in smaller settlements: Flegel, The Island of Kalymnos, 12; also see Sotirios Agapitidis, ‘The Population of Dodecanese’, Nisyriaka 3 (1969), 7; George Sakellaridis, ‘The Population Growth of Kalymnos and Its Causes’, Kalymnian Chronicles 4 (1984), 69–73; by the same, ‘The Evolution and Shaping of the Population of Kalymnos’, Kalymnian Chronicles 9 (1990), 395–405. Flegel, The Island of Kalymnos, 40–41.

252

Olympitou

community, an image still resonant, although the profession itself has almost disappeared: From here to the Customs Office, every inch a tavern. They revelled well. The diver had no other occupation. Upon arriving from his trip, his life was as follows: Day and Night the chaplet, the moustache, the snap shoes, the tight pants … They left the tavern and they were [dressed] in red. Fish … meat … pancakes … wine. Put it on the table he says. They opened the taps and retsina (wine) was flowing to the sea. They brought girls from Petoumi [a town in Asia Minor], and they danced ‘tsifteteli’ [a rhythm and dance of Anatolia and the Balkans], accompanied by the sound of small spoons. They had in the taverns violins, zithers. Whatever money they had, they spent it. All. The sponge divers were dashing, daring men. They stood out from the others. They wanted to walk freely. They went to the taverns and spent all their money to have a good time. It is running through their blood. And then, they deceived no one in their transactions. All was done with a handshake and they always kept their word. They retired and they had no unfinished business left behind. Only a few debts left to the Agricultural Bank. Thus, the sponge-diving world, with its strong stratification, the absence of the crews for months and the risky life of the divers, becomes the raw material that fuels the customary life, the songs, couplets, proverbs, but also the fiction of the Kalymnian novelists and poets. The ‘dance of the engineer’ is, I do believe, one of the most typical examples. Here the leader of the dance imitates the ‘stiff engineer’ – that is, the semi-paralysed sponge diver. The engineer leads the dance with his stick, while his legs tremble as he tries to move. He falls down and gets up several times, but ultimately he is healed, drops the stick and dances as vividly as the rest. Is it a wish or is it a hope that evil can be exorcised? Translated from Greek by Thaleia Spanou Bibliography Agapitidis Sotirios, ‘Η οικονομική δομή των σπογγαλιευτικών ομάδων – κυρίως στη Σύμη’ [The Financial Structure of the Sponge-diving Groups – Especially in the Aegean Island of Symi], Τα συμιακά [Ta symiaka] 3 (1977).

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

253

Agapitidis Sotirios, ‘The Population of Dodecanese’, Nisyriaka 3 (1969). Agriantoni Christina, ‘Προς την βιομηχανική τεχνολογία: οι συντεταγμένες της μεγάλης τομής’ [Towards Industrial Technology: The Coordinates of Great Change], in Ιστορία της νεοελληνικής τεχνολογίας – Τριήμερο εργασίας, Πάτρα, 21–23 Οκτωβρίου 1988 [History of Neohellenic Technology  – Records of the Three-day Working Meeting, Patras, 21–23 October 1988] (Athens, 1991). Dimitropoulos Dimitris and Evdokia Olympitou (eds), Ψαρεύοντας στις ελληνικές θάλασσες. Από τις μαρτυρίες του παρελθόντος στη σύγχρονη πραγματικότητα [Fishing in the Greek Seas: From Historical Testimonies to Contemporary Realities], Τετράδια Εργασίας [Research Notebooks], vol. 33 (Athens: Institute of Historical Research/ NHRF, 2010). Elders of Kalymnos, ‘Ναυτικός Σπογγαλιευτικός Κανονισμός’ [Navy Sponge-diving Regulation], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 5 (1985), 178–95. Flegel Charles, ‘The Dodecanese or Southern Sporades from a Memorandum of the Beginning of the Century’, Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 12 (1997). Flegel Charles, La question des pecheurs d’eponges de la Mediterranee (Cairo: Imprimerie du Guvernement, 1902). Flegel Charles A., The Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Anthimos Z’ in Kalymnos (Samos, 1896). Flegel Charles, The Island of Kalymnos (Constantinople: n.p., 1896). Fourt Maia, Daniel Faget and Thierry Perez, ‘Fighting the Minotaur: Resistance to Technological Change in the Mediterranean Sponge Fishing Industry (1840–1922)’, International Journal of Maritime History 32/2 (2020), 337–53. Fragopoulos Heppocrates, Ιστορία της Καλύμνου [History of Kalymnos] (Athens: Skafandro, 1995). Gerakis Giannis, Σφουγγαράδικες ιστορίες: από την Κάλυμνο του 1900 [Sponge-diving Stories from the Island of Kalymnos of 1900] (Athens, 1999). Grigoropoulos Michael, The Island of Symi, Dissertation on a Geographical, Historical and Statistical Perspective (Athens: n.p., 1877). Hatzidakis, ‘Η σπογγαλιεία στις νότιες Σποράδες στα μέσα του 19ου αιώνα’ [Sponge-diving in the Southern Sporades in the Mid-nineteenth Century], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 13 (1999). Hatzidakis Kyriakos, ‘Κάλυμνος, 1851’ [The Island of Kalymnos, 1851], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 12 (1997). Hatzidakis Kyriakos, ‘Η Κάλυμνος στο τέλος της Τουρκοκρατίας’ [Kalymnos during the Last Years of the Turkish Occupation], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 8 (1989), 86–87.

254

Olympitou

Hatzidakis Kyriakos, ‘Ο αγώνας για την κατάργηση του καταδυτικού σκάφανδρου και ο Κάρολο Flegel’ [The Struggle to Abolish the Diving Helmets and Charles Flegel], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 3 (1982). Haviaras Nikitas, ‘Συμαίων γυμνών σπογγαλιέων φρικτά επεισόδια’ [Horrible Episodes of the Symian Naked Divers], Τα συμιακά [Ta Symiaka] 3 (1977), 285–93. Kalafatas Metrophanes, ‘Χειμερινό όνειρο’ [Winter Dream], Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 5 (1999). Kirkilitsis Andreas, ‘Σπογγαλιεία, πίστη και χρηματοδότηση’ [The Sponge-diving Faith and Finance], Πρακτικά του Πρώτου Σπογγαλιευτικού Συνεδρίου, Ρόδος 1952. Lemonidis Alexandros, Το εμπόριο της Τουρκίας [The Trade of Turkey] (Constantinople, 1849). Lemonnier Pierre, ‘Technologie ou Anthropologie des Techniques?’ in The Agricultural World in The Mediterranean Area, Records of the Greek-French Meeting (Athens, 1988), 334–7. Leroi-Gourhan Andre, Evolution et techniques. I. L’homme et la matiere (Paris: Albin Michel, 1971). Mailis Antonis, ‘Στο Τάρπον Σπρινγκσ’ [In Tarpon Springs], Η Καθημερινή. Επτά Ημέρες [I Kathimerini. Epta Imeres] 13 (Athens, 1996), 37–38. Olimpitou Evdokia, ‘Planning the Journey: Sponge-diving Contracts and Employment Relationships of the Crew in Kalymnos, 19th–20th Cen.’, Proceedings of the Second European Conference of Modern Greek Studies on ‘Greek Islands from the Frankish Occupation Until Today’. Pizanias Nikolaos, ‘Η οργάνωση των σπογγαλιευτικών εταιρειών (τεχνικώς-οικονομικώς)’ [Regulating Sponge-diving Businesses (Technically and Economically)], Πρακτικά του Πρώτου Σπογγαλιευτικού Συνεδρίου, Ρόδος 1952 [Proceedings of the First Spongediving Conference, Rhodes 1952]. Pizanias Nikolaos, Η Κάλυμνος, με βάση τους όρους παραγωγής πλούτου, τους δημογραφικούς, και ιδιαίτερα τους δημοσιονομικούς όρους [Kalymnos as Seen in Wealth Producing, Demographic, and Particularly in Budgetary Terms] (Athens, 1935). Russell Bernard, ‘Kalymnian Sponge Diving’, Human Biology 39/2 (1967). Russo Francois, Εισαγωγή στην ιστορία των τεχνικών [Introduction to the History of Techniques] (Athens: Etva Cultural Technological Institute, 1993). Sakellaridis George, ‘The Evolution and Shaping of the Population of Kalymnos’, Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 9 (1990). Sakellaridis George, ‘The Population Growth of Kalymnos and Its Causes’, Καλυμνιακά Χρονικά [Kalymnian Chronicles] 4 (1984). Simopoulos Kyriakos, Ξένοι ταξιδιώτες στην Ελλάδα 1700–1800 [Foreign Travellers in Greece 1700–1800], vol. 2 (Athens: Piroga Publications, 1995). Tetsis, L’ile d’Hydra et les maladies der plongeurs (Paris, 1881).

the introduction of maritime technology in greek fisheries

255

Μεγάλη Ελληνική Εγκυκλοπαίδεια [Great Greek Encyclopedia], vol. 1 (Athens: Pyrsos, 1926). Zervos Skevos, ‘Η νόσος των γυμνών σπογγαλιέων’ [The Disease of the Naked Spongedivers], Announcement in the Second National Medical Congress (Athens: n.p., 1903). Zervos Skevos, Les anemones de la mer dans la pathologia de l’homme (Paris: Masson, 1937). Νέο Εγκυκλοπαιδικό Λεξικό [New Encyclopedic Dictionary], vol. 17 (Athens). Υπουργείον Ανοικοδομήσεως [Ministry of Reconstruction], vol. 1 (Athens, 1950).

Chapter 11

Business Groups’ Diversification Strategy: The Case of Ralli Bros Diversifying in Shipping Katerina Vourkatioti “The ships of the Maritime ply all over the world on the most profi­ table engagements which can be found for them […] Our friends, Michalinos & Co, Ltd act as managers and also have an investment in the Company.” ‘Ralli Bros Ltd’, London, 1951

⸪ 1

Introduction

During the nineteenth century, British commercial supremacy was based on the numerous merchant houses which, from their headquarters in Britain, expanded and conquered the markets in all imperial territories, especially in Southeast Asia. While maintaining their engagement in commodity trading, most of these companies transformed into global players by diversifying their activities in other sectors  – including goods and services like milling, min­ ing, insurance and shipping – in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries (mostly the latter), and formed business groups.1 Many of these business groups have been studied by leading business his­ torians from a British imperial perspective. Geoffrey Jones, in his pioneering study on the evolution of British merchant houses to multinational compa­ nies, offers an insight into the diversification strategies they implemented in order to cope with adverse economic conditions and to open new investment opportunities. As Jones mentions, the origins of this strategy, which led to the ‘hybrid’ form of the merchant groups, can be found in the late nineteenth

1 Michael B. Miller, Europe and the Maritime World (Athens: Cambridge University Press, 2012).

© Katerina Vourkatioti, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_012

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

257

century.2 In order to build a network of differentiated companies, merchant houses created a number of subsidiaries and affiliated companies through a holding company. These subsidiaries were also engaged in sectors that formed backward or forward linkages to their core trading business, taking advantage of the colonial markets of the British Empire. Through this structure, the com­ panies managed to transform from merchant houses into business groups.3 Vertical integration was cost effective for the existing business but also made possible the expansion into new realms. However, these analyses often underestimate or tend to ignore the differ­ ent ethnic and cultural backgrounds of these business groups, as they have been largely treated as British merchant firms. This has obscured an impor­ tant aspect of the British strategy of incorporating different ethno-religious diasporas as a tool to boost the British economy. In the first decades of the nineteenth century, a number of foreign merchant houses from Europe started to move to London and establish themselves therein, using the institutional, geo-political and economic advantages offered by the world’s leading financial and trade centre. Most of these companies that opened offices in the heart of the City of London belonged to important international trading diaspora communities – German, Scottish, Jewish and Greek – with extended business networks. The tendency to underrate the diasporic nature and origin of these firms conceals an important aspect of the success of these diverse firms and 2 Stanley Chapman, Merchant Enterprise in Britain: From the Industrial Revolution to World War I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 118–19, and Geoffrey Jones, Merchants to Multinationals: British Trading Companies in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 39–41 and 75–77. 3 Geoffrey Jones and Judith Wale, ‘Merchants as Business Groups: British Trading Companies in Asia before 1945’, Business History Review 72 (Autumn 1998). Mark Granovetter, ‘Coase Revisited: Business Groups in the Modern Economy’, Industrial and Corporate Change 4/1 (1995), 93–130; Franco Amatori, ‘Growth via Politics: Business Groups Italian Style’ in Takao Shiba and Masahiro Shimotani (eds), Beyond the Firm: Business Groups in International and Historical Perspective (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997); Alice H. Amsden, ‘South Korea: Enterprising Groups and Entrepreneurial Government’ in Alfred D. Chandler, Franco Amatori and Takashi Hikino (eds), Big Business and the Wealth of Nations (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 109–34; Jesus M. Valdaliso, ‘Grupos empresariales, marco institucional y desarrollo económico en España en el siglo XX: los negocios de la familia Aznar (c. 1937–1983)’, Revista de Historia Económica 20/3 (2002), 577–624; Mark Granovetter, ‘Business Groups and Social Organization’ in Neil J. Smelser and Richard Swedberg (eds), The Handbook of Economic Sociology (Princeton: Russell Sage Foundation, 2005); Tarun Khanna and Yishay Yafeh, ‘Business Groups in Emerging Markets: Paragons or Parasites?’ Journal of Economic Literature 45/2 (2007), 331–72; Asli M. Colpan and Takashi Hikino, ‘Foundations of Business Groups: Towards an Integrated Framework’ in Asli M. Colpan, Takashi Hikino and James R. Lincoln (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Business Groups (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 15–66.

258

Vourkatioti

their ability to adapt and develop within the British imperial context and pro­ mote its expansion. In this chapter, we will try to examine the diversification strategies adopted by such merchant houses and their evolution into global business groups through the example of a well-known yet understudied Greek merchant house with an international impact: Ralli Bros. The case of Maritime Shipping and Trading Co (henceforth MSTC), i.e. the maritime subsidiary of Ralli Bros, proves that the choice of shipping was not coincidental, but derived from a rational business choice based on Britain’s pioneering maritime sector and the advan­ tages raised by their long-term trading experience and the capabilities that originated in the trading networks of the Greek diaspora. Along with other companies, Ralli Bros from the Eastern Mediterranean was established in London and expanded their commercial and maritime activities, forming a business group. In this chapter we will examine the structure under which the maritime company was part of the Ralli Bros group and the impact of its financial results on the Ralli Bros balance sheet. Also, we will examine whether and how diversification paid off, hence justifying their choice. The archival material that we have used in this study are the Guildhall Archives, in particular the series MS 29.916, and The Times newspaper, which include the minutes from the annual meeting of the board of directors pre­ senting the economic output of the previous fiscal year. These two sources combined allow us to get a good view of the economics of both Ralli Bros and MSTC for the period 1948–60. The second source is a private publication of the company in 1951 that refers to all the companies and activities of the Ralli Bros, with a special mention regarding MSTC. Unfortunately, these are all the avail­ able sources. The lack of archives, records and files related to the operation of Greek family firms, even as late as the second half of the twentieth century, makes the reconstruction of their history and activities very difficult.4 The chapter proceeds as follows: in the first part we will see the story of the Ralli Bros merchant house from its beginnings until its sale to Isaac Wolfson. In the second part, we will examine the history of the subsidiary company that the Ralli Bros used to diversify in shipping.

4 Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1954, and The Times (London), 1948–61, ‘Ralli Bros Ltd’, (London: Company publication, 1951).

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

2

259

The Ralli Bros Merchant House

Ralli Bros was a family-based merchant house which originated on the island of Chios and expanded from the Eastern Mediterranean to London. Its success was based on a combination of trading methods which included the use of the extended Greek-Chiot network of merchants, which created diaspora mer­ chant communities and facilitated the integration of Greek merchants into global trade.5 They spanned all the key markets, and especially London, the world’s biggest financial, shipping, banking and merchant centre.6 Ralli Bros was not just another merchant house of this network, but a leading member. It was the family that actually paved the way from the Eastern Mediterranean to London and the rest of the world. What makes Ralli Bros a unique case study is the application of a number of innovative trading methods and the creation of a strong culture and structure within the company.7 The five Ralli brothers founded the company in 1818 and they started their activities concentrating mostly on the areas of the Eastern Mediterranean and Russia, taking advantage of a wide Greek network, which offered them a com­ petitive advantage in these peripheral markets. At the same time, they were open to pursue new adventures and ventures by following the trade routes set by Imperial Britain. Hence, during the period 1814–65, Ralli Bros had expanded via branches in Russia, Constantinople, France, the United States, Persia and India, and traded mostly in grain and cotton.8 The successful transition to the second generation of the Ralli family in 1866 marked the second period of Ralli Bros’ existence, a period which lasted up to the First World War. They successfully reformed the company, keeping those branches and markets which were profitable and showed potential for further growth. At the same time, they expanded and strengthened their presence in India, becoming one of the most important merchant houses in the area. They traded in a number of commodities, especially in linseed, grain, rice, rapeseed, hides and, above all, jute. During this period, we witness a change in the use of 5 Gelina Harlaftis, A History of the Greek-owned Shipping (London: Routledge, 1995), 39–69; Gelina Harlaftis, ‘From Diaspora Traders to Shipping Tycoons: The Vagliano Bros’, Business History Review 81/2 (2007), 237–68. 6 Katerina Galani, ‘Greek Merchants and Bankers in the City of London: The First Settlement (Early 19th Century)’ in Greek-British Relationships (Athens: Greek Parliament’s Institution, 2016), 237–56. 7 Katerina Vourkatioti, ‘Ralli Bros: The Archetype of the Entrepreneurship of the Greek Diaspora, 1819–1960’ (Unpublished PhD thesis, Panteion University, 2004) and Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping, 39–69. 8 Vourkatioti, ‘Ralli Bros’, Chapter 2.

260

Vourkatioti

their business networks. Although they exploited the Greek network in order to recruit officers and employees, at that time they started to rely increasingly on the British structures both in London and in overseas markets.9 The third phase of the company can be found in the interwar period, in one of the most challenging periods in world history, as the booming global economy disintegrated after the First World War. It is during this period that we witness its first steps into geographical and cross-sectoral diversification. Ralli Bros expanded geographically to Africa, the United States and Japan, and launched new subsidiaries in Britain, the rest of Europe and India. In addition, we see vertical diversification with the establishment of jute, cotton, seeds and bone mills.10 The last period of the company was defined as the period between the end of World War II and the sale of the company to Isaac Wolfson in 1961. The prominent characteristic of the period was the intensified diversification of the company’s activities, dictated by the changing global economic and polit­ ical environment, especially in the traditional markets, where Ralli Bros was active. The nationalistic movements in India and Southeast Asia, and their prevalence, brought a number of changes in the way trade was conducted and in corporate laws. Ralli Bros, along with the rest of the merchants in the area, needed to diversify into other markets and lines of products in order to address these adversities.11 Merchant houses used diversification to a significant degree during this period in order to face greater challenges than in any other period of their existence. Their initial move was to diversify towards products that were not in their scope in the past. On a second level, they turned to all kinds of ser­ vices and they expanded into insurance, finance, shipping and anything that appeared to have potential for profit. The concept behind diversification in this period was not just risk management and hedging. It was important for their proper existence to expand and generate revenues in order to secure their continuity, as their traditional markets were almost collapsing. Diversification did not necessarily signify substitution. It should be noted that the companies kept their activities up and running in the traditional areas where they had thrived in the past. Hence, we see Ralli Bros’ geographical diversification into Africa is cou­ pled with diversification into new commodity markets in various different countries in which they had no previous experience. They continued their 9 10 11

Vourkatioti, ‘Ralli Bros’, Chapter 3. Vourkatioti, ‘Ralli Bros’, Chapter 4. Vourkatioti, ‘Ralli Bros’, Chapter 5.

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

261

geographical expansion into different Asian territories and the Middle East (Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey). Their expansion into new business areas was also pursued with new ventures, which spanned from insurances, financial services and shipping to technology-intensified products (e.g. electric tools) and a mail order company. Their vertical diversification did not follow the same trend as the political turbulence in the Indian sub-continent caused the separation of the production areas from the respective mills. The changing conditions had a significant impact on Ralli Bros’ traditional trading sector, which remained central for their activities in this period. In 1961 Isaac Wolfson proceeded with the buyout of Ralli Bros.12 From this short overview of the history of Ralli Bros, we can identify a few crucial points. First, it was a family-owned company, which survived for five generations and approximately 160 years. Although it had been the most suc­ cessful member of the wider Greek diaspora network since the early nine­ teenth century, the firm followed closely the strategies and patterns of the British merchant houses. This strategic choice brought them among the most significant houses in Britain. The geographical expansion and the continuous and intensified diversification into other sectors led to the evolution of Ralli Bros from a traditional merchant house to a global business group.13 Table 11.1 provides us with the size of the invested capital of Ralli Bros in comparison to other leading British merchant houses that were dominant in the Far East, such as Jardine Matheson & Co, James Finlay & Co and John Swire & Son, for the same period. As we can see, there was a steady increase of invested capital that peaked in 1954 at 9.4 million pounds, far exceeding the equivalent investments of the rest of the companies. The comparative perspective can identify similarities among international merchant houses. In the course of the first half of the nineteenth century, they all managed to expand and settle in new areas of interest, mainly in East Asia. The specific pattern of geographical expansion was not incidental. The newly established British colonies offered them a protected environment and unex­ ploited markets open to the import of British manufactured goods. The insti­ tutional and economic framework of the British Empire provided them with a competitive advantage over their rivals. The next crucial step was to identify the locally produced commodities which could be useful to the British indus­ try and world markets. On this ground, agencies and branches of the merchant houses, based in the metropolis, mushroomed in the East and mainly in the Indian sub-continent. Besides Ralli Bros, there were several other examples 12 13

Vourkatioti, ‘Ralli Bros’, Chapter 5. Vourkatioti, ‘Ralli Bros’, Chapter 5.

262

Vourkatioti

Table 11.1 Invested capital of leading Far Eastern companies, 1830–1954 (Company’s capital in million £)

Year

Ralli Bros Jardine Matheson & Co James Finlay & Co John Swire & Son

1830 1840 1850 1878 1880 1901–2 1954

0.14 0.17 0.5 1.2 2 3–4.20 9.4

1.47 (in 1836) 1.67 1.12 2.17 (in 1870) 1.34 2 (in 1910) 6 (in 1957)

– – – 0.45 (in 1870) 0.78 (in 1882) 0.96 (in 1903) 6

– – – – 0.2 (in 1879) 0.94 (in 1900) 1.7

Source: Geoffrey Jones, Merchants to Multinationals (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 184; Stanley Chapman, Merchant Enterprise in Britain: From the Industrial Revolution to World War I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 313–14.

like the merchant houses of Graham, James Finlay and Harrison & Crosfield.14 They sought new opportunities through new forms of investments in other business activities, besides trading. Following the turmoil of the First World War, during the interwar period diversification strategies were very common among merchant companies. At first, they invested in process mills for the commodities they traded in. After 1920, they started applying similar strategies towards product and service dif­ ferentiation. The main reason for this shift was the fact that this kind of diver­ sification was more effective as a risk management strategy than for vertical integration.15 The economic and financial situation following the First World War pushed the merchant houses towards new paths of differentiation. However, risk management of the adverse market changes was actually the major reason that led the businesses’ diversification strategies. Through this, they could easily gain access to new and different business areas. They used this model, which derived from the aforementioned activities, and acquired a number 14

15

Stanley Chapman, Merchant Enterprise in Britain, 3–17 and 107–28, and Geoffrey Jones, Merchants to Multinationals (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 39–77 and Stanley Chapman, ‘British Marketing Enterprise: The Changing Roles of Merchants, Manufacturers and Financiers, 1700–1860’, Business History Review 53/2 (Summer 1979). Gordon Boyce and Simon Ville, The Development of Modern Business (Athens: Palgrave, 2005), 15–17.

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

263

of companies, thus building a business group with interlinked relationships among its constituent parts.16 In particular, after World War II, it was clear that the changing economic and political conditions in Asia posed great challenges to the traditional British merchant houses. The end of the Raj, the separation of India and Pakistan and the continuously growing movements for independence changed the East Asian area decisively. Merchant groups had to adjust to increased taxation and state interventions to business activities and strategies. In some cases, they even had to accept the nationalisation of their assets, and some companies fled the areas where they were established and had traded for many decades. However, even those which remained had to face challenges and irregularities, including changes in the composition of the board of directors and even in the ownership of the companies.17 In order to face these new challenges, they had to shift their interests and decided to diversify in different geographies and sectors. During the 1940s we can see a geographic shift towards Africa, especially in areas that were under British colonial control (Kenya. Sudan, Uganda, South Africa). Another type of diversification involved new business ventures related to products that required evolving technical knowledge, or a sector of services, like shipping. Shipping, a familiar sector to these business groups, attracted investments. In fact, this interest in shipping was one of their oldest, and they had been investing in similar ventures since the nineteenth century. Investment in ship­ ping was treated or conceived as a specialised business, independent from gen­ eral trade, that provided them with a significant new market.18 In particular, we find significant merchant groups investing in shipping companies. The case of Booker McConnell, which owned the shipping com­ pany Booker Line, a linear company that also expanded into tramp shipping, is a typical one. At the end of the 1940s, UAC and John Holt also invested in shipping companies: the linear companies Palm Line and Guinea Gulf Line, respectively. Finally, after 1940, the Jardine Matheson and Swire companies 16 17

18

Boyce and Ville, The Development of Modern Business, 111–12, 166 and 268–9. Indicative bibliography: Percival Griffiths, The British Impact on India (London: Macdonald, 1952); Lawrence James, Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India (London: Abacus, 1997); Dharma Kumar (ed.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, 1757–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983); Peter J. Marshall (ed.), Trade and Conquest: Studies on the Rise of British Dominance in India (Aldershot: Variorum, 1993); B.R. Tomlinson, ‘Imperial Power and Foreign Trade: Britain and India (1900–1970)’ in Peter Mathias and John A. Davis (eds), International Trade and British Economic Growth (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 1996), 146–62. Chapman, Merchant Enterprise in Britain, 210–11.

264

Vourkatioti

emerged as significant shipowners. Their companies, Indo-China Steam Navi­ gation Company and China Navigation Company, active both in linear and tramp shipping, provided them with a significant share of their total profits, which, in the case of Swire, amounted to one third of its turnover.19 In the next part of this chapter, we will examine the MSTC, the company Ralli Bros used as a vehicle to diversify in shipping. We will present its structure, the fleet and its evolution through the years, including its economic results for the period 1948–61 in conjunction with Ralli Bros’ results. 3

Maritime Shipping and Trading Company

Maritime and Shipping and Trading Co Ltd (MSTC), originally established in the United Kingdom in 1919 and purchased in 1942 from W.J. Tatem of Cardiff together with its single ship, was considered as one of the most important companies owned by Ralli Bros. The firm’s history ends in 1974 with the sale of its last ship and its dissolution. At the time, its capital amounted to £90,000 divided between 600,000 shares, out of which Ralli Bros held 503,676 shares (84%). Michalinos & Co Ltd, a Greek shipping firm closely related to Ralli Bros, acted as managers for this company and held a small number of its shares. After the buyout by Wolfson, Michalinos & Co Ltd continued to be the managing company, probably in order to dispose of all ships and liquidate the company. Ralli Bros had been more or less involved in shipping during the previous years; however, this was the first time it had direct involvement in a shipping company. When the company decided to get actively involved in shipping, changes were taking place in commodity trading around the world. It was a period when merchant houses were beginning to turn to other types of com­ panies in order to address the diminishing role of London, especially after the war.20 Both Ralli Bros and Michalinos & Co Ltd were Greek diaspora entrepreneurs who moved to London in order to take advantage of the opportunities offered there. Their ties were very close, as indicated by an utterance in a company book published by Ralli Bros in 1951, where Michalinos & Co Ltd were described as ‘our friends’. In this partnership we actually witness another example of

19 20

Jones, Merchants to Multinationals, 177–222. Jones, Merchants to Multinationals, 200–221.

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

265

Ralli Bros turning to the Greek business network to ensure trustworthy manag­ ers for their company.21 The importance of the shipping company is demonstrated by the composi­ tion of its board. The directors of MSTC were G.A. Tachmindjis, who served as the Chairman of the Board, Sir Strati Ralli and J.A. Vlasto. The latter two were also members of the board for Ralli Bros. In fact, Sir Strati Ralli was the Chairman of the Board of Ralli Bros, and when he retired, his position was taken over by Jack Vlastos. Vlastos was actually the last Chairman of Ralli Bros before its buy­ out by Isaac Wolfson. On the other hand, Michalinos also had a great interest in the company; this is why he appointed as Chairman G.A. Tachmindjis, who was the nephew of Zorzis Michalinos, the founder of the mother company Michalinos & Co Ltd, and destined to be his successor.22 MSTC was independent of the holding company, Ralli Bros, and it sought its own goals and interests. There were cases when the ships of MSTC were chartered by one of the Ralli Bros group of companies in order to carry their cargoes, but this was only when their interests met and thus on a complimen­ tary/discretionary basis. There is no evidence in any of the existing records as to which of the group’s companies actually chartered the ships of MSTC.23 In general, the ships of MSTC were tramp ships that ploughed the seas and oceans in search of profitable charters. Unfortunately, there are no records whatsoever regarding the cargoes, or any kind of information which would allow us to have a better view of the company’s engagements and activities.24 In an attempt to get a clear view of MSTC’s size and scale of operations within the Ralli Bros group, we will use as a proxy the size of staff engaged in these companies. From Table 11.2 we get an overview of the staff MSTC engaged both in her offices in Britain and on her ships. As we can observe from the above table, in terms of administrative staff the company employed a high pro­ portion of people, which was similar to the rest of the affiliates. In terms of the workers, it had less than almost any other company, as ships deploy a limited number of men. In Table 11.3 we can see the list of all the ships MSTC owned from 1942 up to 1961, along with the date of build and date of disposal by the company. In 1951, when we have the first full data on MSTC, it had a fleet of six ships. They were 21

22 23 24

‘Ralli Bros Ltd’ (Company publication, London, 1951), 32. For the company Michalinos & Co Ltd, see Gelina Harlaftis, Nikos Vlassopoulos and Helen Beneki, Ploto: Greek Shipowners from the End of the 18th Century up to the Eve of World War II (Athens: Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive, 2003), 249–50. Timothy Catsiyannis, The Greek Community of London (London: n.p., 1993), 666–8. ‘Ralli Bros Ltd’, 32. ‘Ralli Bros Ltd’, 32.

266

Vourkatioti

Table 11.2 Ralli Βros’ group personnel, 1951

Company

Administration

Workers

Ralli Bros Ltd – Britain Ralli Bros Ltd – West Pakistan Ralli Bros Ltd – East Pakistan Ralli Bros Ltd – Other offices outside Britain Ralli Bros Ltd – Dindira (Tanganyika) Ralli Bros Ltd – Magut (South Africa) Berg River Textiles Vereinigte Jute Ralli Estates MSTC (office staff and mariners) Margach & Margach Rallis India Total

255 508 335 93 10 4 30 200 36 38 5 2,666 4,180

106 896 6,540a 83 500 150 600 3,600 2,500 105 400 2,197 17,677

a The largest fraction of these workers was seasonal and according to business needs. Source: ‘Ralli Bros Ltd’ (company publication, London, 1951), 15. TABLE 11.3 MSTC’s fleet from 1942 up to 1961

Ship name

Date built

Date purchased by MSTC

Date sold by MSTC

Appledore I Mapledore Loradore Indore Castledore Stratidore Appledore II Georgidore Castledore II Loradore II Riverdore

1929 1930 1931 1943 1944 1949 1953 1954 1956 1958 1959

1942 1943 1944 1945 1947 1949 1953 1954 1956 1958 1959

1950 1960 (scrapped) 1955 (wrecked) 1961 1951 (wrecked) 1962 1964 1964 1964 1967 1974

Source: ‘Ralli Bros Ltd’ (Company publication, London, 1951), 32 and www.mariners-list.com

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

267

all listed on Lloyd’s Register and were carrying the British flag. Among them, we see the ship Stratidore, which was considered as the company’s finest ship, named after Sir Strati Ralli and launched by Lady Ralli in December 1948. This ship was sold in 1960 to a Turkish company.25 One of the first ships of the com­ pany was Appledore, which was sold to Cia de Nav. Centrale, a Panama-based company, at the end of 1950, as it was quite old. The other three company ships in 1951 were Mapledore (7,565 dwt), Loradore (8,010 dwt) and Indore (10,245 dwt). The company bought these ships between 1943 and 1945 from other ship­ ping companies. In 1960, Mapledore was scrapped, while Indore was sold to the United Merchants Shipping of London in 1961. At the beginning of 1951 another ship, the Castledore (10,660 dwt), had an accident: it lost its propeller and was driven onto the rocks of the northwest coast of Spain. The ship was completely destroyed, but fortunately the cargo was saved. Hence, in 1951 the fleet of the company was reduced to four ships. At the same time, two new ships were already on order, according to the latest technological updates, and their cost was up to £400,000 each. These ships were Appledore II (10.500 dwt) and Georgidore, which were delivered to the company in 1953 and 1954, respectively. In 1964, Appledore was sold to the Persian Shipping Services in London, and Georgidore to Lily C. Michalos in Piraeus. On 13 August 1955, another ship, the Loradore, was wrecked in fog on the Magdalen Islands in the Gulf of St Lawrence. In view of the above data, MSTC proceeded with the order of another three ships: Castledore II, Loradore II and Riverdore. These ships replaced the wrecked ones in an effort to take advantage of the favourable economic cir­ cumstances for tramp shipping at that time. They were delivered in 1956, 1958 and 1959. In that year, MSTC owned the largest fleet, comprising eight ships. However, this did not last, as those three ships were sold in 1964, 1966 and 1974 to companies in London, Piraeus and Panama, respectively.26 Ralli Bros, as the primary shareholder of the company, and Michalinos & Co Ltd, as the manag­ ing company, invested extensively in MSTC. They continuously renewed their fleet and replaced the ships that were lost. The importance of this affiliated company for the Ralli Bros group is evi­ dent in the annual meeting of the board of directors. During this meeting, the results of each of the subsidiary and the affiliate companies were presented to the board. Through these reports, we can infer that MSTC had an important 25 26

‘Ralli Bros Ltd’, 32. Castledore II was sold to United Merchants Shipping, London, Loradore II was sold to Argo (Hellas) Shipping in Piraeus and Riverdore was sold to Ardmore Shipping in Panama. Ralli Bros Ltd (London, 1951), 32 and www.mariners-list.com.

268

Vourkatioti

Figure 11.1

Profit – loss (£) of MSTC vs Ralli Bros group (1951–60) Source: Processed data; Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1954, and The Times, 1948–61.

impact on Ralli Bros’ total outcome. In these meetings, the company’s prof­ its and losses was discussed and compared to the economic performance of the entire group, accompanied by brief references to key factors which had affected the previous year’s outcome; finally, an economic outlook was pro­ vided based on the run rate and the prevailing conditions in the first months of the year.27 Figure 11.1 presents the economic performance of MSTC for the period 1951– 60, for which we have available data. Although we do not have exact figures for all the years, based on the remarks and notes from the meetings, we man­ aged to reconstruct the profit – loss trend of the company in an attempt to provide a graphical representation of the company’s economic results. Along with these data, we have plotted the profit – loss rate after tax that the Ralli group reported for the same period. In this way, we can examine the correla­ tion between the two companies. At first glance, the diagram shows a very interesting correlation. A first remark is that the Ralli Bros financial performance had more fluctuations  – and sharper ones – than those of MSTC. Additionally, it is interesting that in most occasions the fluctuations of the two companies’ peaks and downfalls do not converge. The two peaks presented in the diagram are related to two major world events that affected shipping and freight rates significantly: the Korean War in 1951 and the Suez Canal crisis (closure of the canal) in 1956. 27

Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1954, and The Times (London), 1948–61.

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

269

The first report on the MSTC’s results refers to the closure of the economic year, which ended in March 1952. Their profit reached £370,000, which was considered a ‘record’: it became one of the top two contributors to the Ralli Bros group profit, the other one being Ralli Estates in Tanganyika. The two com­ panies’ profits accounted for over 40% of Ralli’s total earnings. The positive results were related to a booming shipping market, as the company managed to take full advantage of the high freight rates through very profitable con­ tracts. Based on these results, the company managed to add significantly to her capital. Additionally, the liquid assets were high enough to defray the full cost of the first ship that was on order at that time and also gain additional profit, which would contribute to another new ship also on order at that time.28 The following year, 1953, was quite profitable despite, decreasing freight rates.29 The data regarding the economic year 1952–3 were limited to the compa­ ny’s fleet and overall balance. As they were expecting Georgidore to be deliv­ ered, the report stated that the company’s ships were six, while the year was assessed as a profitable one for MSTC, although it was not comparable to the previous year’s record. The projection for the following financial year was pos­ itive, as they expected satisfactory results.30 The year 1953–4 was not a good one for Ralli Bros. They faced fierce com­ petition and their earnings significantly decreased. The report for that period mentioned overall data for the group and only scarce notes on the affiliates/ subsidiaries. MSTC was only recorded in the outlook section, along with the other affiliates/subsidiaries, which were more on track in comparison to the group. In addition, increasing freight rates raised the expectations for the finan­ cial year 1954–5. As MSTC had six ships in operation, they were in a position to take advantage of the market conditions and achieve satisfactory results.31 In the next year’s meeting, held in March 1956, the reported results showed that the expected positive outlook actually materialised in significant profits. The high freight rates helped MSTC to increase their profits. However, that year was also marked by Loradore’s accident: she ran aground and was declared a total loss. Nevertheless, they were positive in general, as, in the following year, they expected the first of the three ships that they had on order. The projec­ tion for 1956, on the other hand, was not very encouraging. They anticipated reduced profits from the trading sector if they did not manage to change their profit margins. Although they believed that MSTC, along with the rest of the 28 29 30 31

The first ship was Appledore II and the second was Georgidore. Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1954, and The Times (London), 1 May 1953. Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1954, and The Times (London), 3 April 1954. Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1954, and The Times (London), 3 March 1955.

270

Vourkatioti

subsidiaries, would have a good year, they did not expect the profits to be high enough to offset the overall poor outcome.32 The positive results continued during the period 1956–7. As described in the report, MSTC ‘enjoyed a splendid year’. It seems that the way they handled their contracts, keeping fixed commitments at a low level, had paid back. The main reason was probably that they were in a position to book profitable contracts, taking advantage of the high freight rates. One additional positive element was the reinstatement of the fleet to six ships after the delivery of the new ship Castledore II. Despite the optimistic prospects, recorded in the first section of the report, it was clear that the Middle East (Suez) crisis was affecting them, though they were not in a position to assess its exact impact. This is the main reason there was no expected results reported from the subsidiaries.33 Their fears proved correct, as reflected in the results of the Ralli Bros for the year ending in August 1957, although the same crisis raised freight rates in tramp shipping. MSTC’s efficient management team took full advantage of these circumstances, leading to not only a very profitable year, but actually a record year. These results were compensating for the losses reported in the trading sector of the group. The following year’s outlook was positive in gen­ eral. The addition of a new ship and the execution of some contracts in the old high freight rates were positive signs. However, since the circumstances in shipping had changed and the freight rates had dropped, they expected signif­ icantly reduced earnings for MSTC.34 The interesting element of the results of 1958 was that MSTC had a profitable year and, in fact, made a significant contribution to that year’s results, increas­ ing the trading profit by the amount of £274,682. Certainly, the contracts which were conducted at high freights provide an explanation for the encouraging results. However, during the next year, all six ships had contracts at low rates, following the prevailing market trend, and the results were very disappointing, as they only managed to cover their running expenses. What appeared to be more disappointing was the fact that there were no signs of recovery in the market. As Jack Vlastos mentioned during the meeting, MSTC was considered a major contributor in Ralli Bros’ earnings and its inability to continue that trend was rather frustrating for the management.35

32 33 34 35

Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1955, and The Times (London), 6 March 1956. Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1956, and The Times (London), 5 March 1957. Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1958, and The Times (London), 5 March 1958. Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1959, G. H. L. and The Times (London), 4 March 1959.

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

271

The gloomy forecast of 1959 proved to be accurate. In the meeting held in March 1960, it was the first time in a decade that the results of MSTC were not positive. It was the first year that it reported losses, which reached the amount of £18,162. Low freight rates that could not be offset by the few contracts at hand and the depreciation of the ships, which reached the amount of £114,745, impacted on the financial results. Although this record affected only that year, the outlook did not show many positive signs. The encouraging fact was that all ships were fully employed and the rates showed signs of recovery. It is noteworthy that MSTC’s management was praised for taking advantage of the opportunities when presented.36 The last year for which we have analytic data for the MSTC is 1960. They were presented in the last annual meeting, as two months after this Ralli Bros was bought by Isaac Wolfson. During that meeting, losses were reported for a second consecutive year for MSTC. The actual number was £79,078, four times higher than the loss which was reported the previous year. Interestingly enough, the amount would have been even higher, if they had not discarded Mapledore for the amount of £39,043. The anticipated financial results for 1961 were also rather pessimistic, with only scarce expectations of recovery deriv­ ing from the changing conditions in tramp shipping.37 The overall financial outcome (profit  – loss) of MSTC plotted against the course of the freight rates of bulk carriers during the period 1951–60 (see Graph 11.2) can provide an evaluation of the company’s performance. What we can see is that the result of each financial year of MSTC for the period 1951–9 was consistent with the course of the freight rates. A pronounced divergence is marked in the last year, 1960, when freight rates stabilised at low levels, while MSTC continued to show losses. Unfortunately, there are no other data related to the company. There are mere indications that Michalinos & Co Ltd retained the company for a few more years, during which time they gradually disposed of all ships, and by 1974 the company had closed, following the sale of the last two ships.38 The original intentions of the buyer, Isaac Wolfson, remain in question. From the above analysis of the company’s structure and its activities as an independent company and as part of the Ralli Bros business group, we can see the framework under which the diversification into shipping through MSTC was implemented and whether it was successful.

36 37 38

The Times (London), 3 March 1960. The Times (London), 3 March 1961. This information was retrieved from the website: www.mariners-list.com.

272

Vourkatioti

Figure 11.2

4

Profit – loss MSTC in comparison to bulk carriers’ freight rates, 1951–60 Source: Processed data; Guildhall Library, Ralli Papers, MS 29.916, 1954, and The Times, 1948–61 and G. Harlaftis, ‘A History of Greek-owned Shipping’, 425.

Conclusions

Diversification was a strategy followed extensively by the British-based inter­ national merchant houses. It helped them exploit new areas of interest, expand their activities and successfully face challenges in a rapidly changing economic and political environment. Through this strategy, which was not confined to shipping but covered other goods and services, we actually witness the evolu­ tion of the merchant houses into a new form of operation: the business group. Diversification into shipping, in particular, proved a rather successful strategy, and almost all major merchant houses applied it to some extent. After all, it was a market full of opportunities, which offered significant revenues for the companies, despite the adversities they had to face. Ralli Bros is an excellent example of one of these emerging groups, as it was a traditional merchant house which used both the family- and origin-based networks, along with the structures of the empire in order to expand and pre­ vail in global trade. Additionally, it identified the necessity of diversification and explored the opportunities in the area. Ralli Bros was composed of many different companies which, however, did not manifest the same successful results as MSTC. Some of these ventures were poorly researched, which meant that they lacked crucial information on the market they targeted. On the other

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

273

hand, although some business ideas might have been right, they were not given enough time to expand, flourish and show favourable results. The group’s expansion into shipping was not just another investment, but also an important one. MSTC was a successful venture for Ralli Bros. The deci­ sion to enter this market was made at an excellent time, and the company managed to follow the trend and generate revenues. The launch of MSTC was timely, and the company was given enough given time to show results. The most crucial decision for the establishment of the shipping company was the decision to use the Ralli Bros diaspora network once again and cooperate with a prominent maritime company that had the know-how to run their business. Management is a crucial element for companies, and Ralli Bros was no exception. This was proven by their long-standing history. The starting point was the inspiring leadership of Pandias Ralli, who not only navigated the company from the Eastern Mediterranean to London and global markets but also secured its future by choosing the most efficient leaders to continue this course. Stephen Ralli continued this successful pattern and made Ralli Bros one of the most prominent firms not only in Britain and the colonies, but worldwide. However, in the following decades the leaders of the company did not fol­ low suit. They appeared shortsighted and not only lacked expertise but were also unwilling to trust experienced managers to lead them in the new era. Unfortunately, Jack Vlastos, an efficient manager and natural leader with inno­ vative ideas and a good view of the markets, took over the directorship too late. There was not enough time for these ideas to flourish and deliver the expected results. In that sense, the diversification into shipping and MSTC was important not only as an investment that was very successful, but also as an example of efficient management. Ralli Bros understood that expertise and business net­ works were crucial in this sector, and hence it turned to the right people to take up this venture, Michalinos & Co Ltd, giving its team the freedom to decide on the best way to run this company. Bibliography Amatori Franco, ‘Growth via Politics: Business Groups Italian Style’ in Takao Shiba and Masahiro Shimotani (eds), Beyond the Firm: Business Groups in International and Historical Perspective (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 109–134. Amsden Alice H., ‘South Korea: Enterprising Groups and Entrepreneurial Government’ in Alfred D. Chandler, Franco Amatori and Takashi Hikino (eds), Big Business and the Wealth of Nations (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 336–367.

274

Vourkatioti

Boyce Gordon and Simon Ville, The Development of Modern Business (Athens: Palgrave, 2005). Catsiyannis Timothy, The Greek Community of London (London: n.p., 1993). Chapman Stanley, Merchant Enterprise in Britain: From the Industrial Revolution to World War I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Chapman Stanley, ‘British Marketing Enterprise: The Changing Roles of Merchants, Manufacturers and Financiers, 1700–1860’, Business History Review 53/2 (Summer 1979), 205–234. Colpan Asli M. and Takashi Hikino, ‘Foundations of Business Groups: Towards an Integrated Framework’ in Asli M. Colpan, Takashi Hikino and James R. Lincoln (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Business Groups (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 15–66. Galani Katerina, ‘Greek Merchants and Bankers in the City of London: The First Set­ tlement (Early 19th Century)’ in Greek-British Relationships (Athens: Greek Parlia­ ment’s Institution, 2016), 237–56. Granovetter Mark, ‘Business Groups and Social Organization’ in Neil J. Smelser and Richard Swedberg (eds), The Handbook of Economic Sociology (Princeton: Russell Sage Foundation, 2005), 429–450. Granovetter Mark, ‘Coase Revisited: Business Groups in the Modern Economy’, Industrial and Corporate Change 4/1 (1995), 93–130. Griffiths Percival, The British Impact on India (London: Macdonald, 1952). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘From Diaspora Traders to Shipping Tycoons: The Vagliano Bros’, Business History Review 81/2 (2007), 237–68. Harlaftis Gelina, Nikos Vlassopoulos and Helen Beneki, Ploto: Greek Shipowners from the End of the 18th Century up to the Eve of World War II (Athens: Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive, 2003). Harlaftis Gelina, A History of the Greek-owned Shipping (London: Routledge, 1995). James Lawrence, Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India (London: Abacus, 1997). Jones Geoffrey, Merchants to Multinationals: British Trading Companies in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). Jones Geoffrey and Judith Wale, ‘Merchants as Business Groups: British Trading Com­ panies in Asia before 1945’, Business History Review 72 (Autumn 1998), 367–408. Khanna Tarun and Yishay Yafeh, ‘Business Groups in Emerging Markets: Paragons or Parasites?’ Journal of Economic Literature 45/2 (2007), 331–72. Kumar Dharma (ed.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, 1757–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Marshall Peter J. (ed.), Trade and Conquest: Studies on the Rise of British Dominance in India (Aldershot: Variorum, 1993). Miller Michael B., Europe and the Maritime World (Athens: Cambridge University Press, 2012).

Business Groups ’ Diversification Strategy

275

Ralli Bros Ltd (Company publication, London, 1951). Tomlinson B.R., ‘Imperial Power and Foreign Trade: Britain and India (1900–1970)’ in Peter Mathias and Davis John A. (eds), International Trade and British Economic Growth (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 1996). Valdaliso Jesus M., ‘Grupos empresariales, marco institucional y desarrollo económico en España en el siglo XX: los negocios de la familia Aznar (c. 1937–1983)’, Revista de Historia Económica 20/3 (2002), 577–624. Vourkatioti Katerina, ‘Ralli Bros: The Archetype of the Entrepreneurship of the Greek Diaspora, 1819–1960’ (PhD thesis, Panteion University, 2004).

Chapter 12

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century: The Human Resources Ioannis Theotokas 1

Introduction

Greek-owned fleets are a prime example of cross-traders that succeeded in remaining competitive in the international freight markets for many decades. It has been contended that this success seems to be a paradox.1 Greek-owned shipping companies come from a nation with a very small share in world seaborne trade, with limited home demand for shipping services, with no substantial help from supporting industries and with capital requirements that could not be met by the domestic capital resources. However, the statistics of the international fleet reveal that it is the only traditional shipping nation that has almost continually increased its share in international shipping during the last fifty years. Various interpretations of this successful path are proposed in the literature on Greek shipping.2 Recently, a number of studies focused more on the resources or on particular structural characteristics of the fleet.3 1 Ioannis Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping: Greek Shipping Companies’ Organization and Management’ in Athanasios Pallis, Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm, Research in Transportation Economics, vol. 21 (London: Elsevier, 2007), 63–93. 2 See Gelina Harlaftis, Greek Shipowners, the Economy and the State (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1993); Helen Thanopoulou, Greek and International Shipping (Athens: Papazisis, 1994); Gelina Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping (London: Routledge, 1996); Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Organizational and Managerial Patterns of Greek-owned Shipping Companies, 1969–1990’ (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Piraeus, 1997) [in Greek]; Ioannis N. Lagoudis and Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Competitive Advantage in the Greek Shipping Industry: A Supply Chain Management Approach’ in Pallis, Maritime Transport, 95–120; Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’; Ioannis Theotokas and Gelina Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping (London: Palgrave, 2009). 3 Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’; Ioannis Theotokas and Maria Progoulaki, ‘Seafarers as a Strategic Resource of Shipping Companies: The Greek Context’, International Association of Maritime Economist (IAME) Annual Conference (Athens, 2007); Ioannis Theotokas et al., Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness (Athens: Gutenberg, 2008); Gelina Harlaftis, Helen A. Thanopoulou and Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Το παρόν και το μέλλον της Ελληνικής ναυτιλίας’ [Greek Shipping: Current Trends and Future Prospects], Academy of Athens, Office of Economic Research, Study no. 10 (Athens, 2009) [in Greek]; Helen A. Thanopoulou, Ioannis

© Ioannis Theotokas, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_013

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

277

This chapter moves this research direction forward, to focus on what is considered as the resource that primarily contributed to the successful path of the Greek-owned fleet – that is, the human resources. The approach that this analysis deploys to shed light on the development of Greek shipping comes from one of the most important research streams of the strategic management theory: the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm. The paper examines human resources’ characteristics and the ways they defined the performance of the shipping companies in the specific context. Human resources and their contribution to competitiveness are analysed on two levels. The first concerns the Greek shipowners and maritime entrepreneurship, which is very strictly related to the second level, the seafarers, which proved the main source of entrepreneurship for Greek shipping, if one takes into account that the vast majority of the first generation of shipowners started their careers as ship officers. The structure of this chapter is as follows. The second section of the chapter discusses the framework of analysis and examines entrepreneurship and human resources in the context of the RBV of the firm. The third focuses on human resources and entrepreneurship in Greek-owned shipping, while the fourth relates the competitiveness of the fleet to the employment of Greek seafarers. In the fifth section the contribution of the shipping offices’ employees is discussed, while in the sixth the conclusions of the analysis are presented. 2

The Framework of Analysis: Maritime Entrepreneurship and the RBV of the Firm

The resource-based view of the firm has been applied to the analysis of the firms’ competitiveness. At the same time, it has been applied to the analysis of a group of firms in the context of a network or a cluster, as well as to the analysis of the competitiveness of a state.4 Previous research proposed that the RBV Theotokas and Anastasia Constantelou, ‘Leading by Following: Innovation and Post-war Strategies of Greek Shipowners’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/2 (2010), 199– 255; Stig Tenold and Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Shipping Innovation: The Different Paths of Greece and Norway’, International Journal of Decision Science, Risk and Management 5/2 (2013), 142–60. 4 See John A. Mathews, ‘A Resource-based View of Schumpeterian Economic Dynamics’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 12 (2002), 29–54; Mathews, ‘Competitive Dynamics and Economic Learning: An Extended Resource-based View’, Industrial and Corporate Change 12/1 (2003), 115–45; Eduardo de Oliveira Wilk and Jaime Evaldo Fensterseifer, ‘Use of Resource-based View in Industrial Cluster Strategic Analysis’, International Journal of Operations & Production Management 23/9 (2003), 995–1009.

278

Theotokas

is the proper tool for the analysis of the sustainable competitive advantage of the Greek-owned shipping companies.5 What the RBV of the firm proposes is that every firm is the sum of the resources and capabilities that can contribute to its competitiveness in the long run. As resources are considered the assets or the inputs that the firm owns or has access to, capabilities are characterised by the ability ‘to perform a coordinated set of tasks, utilizing organizational resources for the purpose of achieving a particular end result’.6 Contrary to the neo-classical approach that makes the assumption that the supply of resources is elastic, the RBV is based on the assumption that for specific resources the supply is inelastic. This is because their supply can be increased only in the long run or due to the fact that they are not offered in the market.7 Resources that are rare, cannot be easily imitated and substituted and are of high value, can form the basis for the creation of a sustainable competitive advantage.8 Resources have been classified into physical capital, organisational capital and human capital resources;9 tangible, intangible and human resources;10 tangible and intangible;11 and people-dependent and people-independent.12 The RBV contends that the resources that lead to the persistent performance differentials are much broader in nature and more difficult to accumulate than the tangible assets and the factors of production typically emphasised in neo-classical economic theories.13 The importance of intangible resources and of human resources and their contribution to the exploitation of tangible resources and the development of capabilities within the firms have been examined in various studies during the last few years.

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’. See Constance E. Helfat and Margaret A. Peteraf, ‘The Dynamic Resource-based View: Capability Lifecycles’, Strategic Management Journal 24 (2003), 999. Jay B. Barney, ‘Resource-based Theories of Competitive Advantage: A Ten-year Retrospective on the Resource-based View’, Journal of Management 27 (2001), 643–50. Jay B. Barney, ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Management 17/1 (1991), 99–120. Barney, ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage’. Robert M. Grant, The Contemporary Strategy Analysis (Oxford: John Wiley and Sons, 1998). Jeremy Galbreath, ‘Which Resources Matter the Most to Firm Success? An Explanatory Study of Resource-based Theory’, Technovation 25 (2005), 979–87. Richard Hall, ‘The Strategic Analysis of Intangible Resources’, Strategic Management Journal 13 (1993), 135–44. Michael J. Leiblein, ‘The Choice of Organizational Governance Form and Performance: Predictions from Transaction Cost, Resource-based and Real Options Theories’, Journal of Management 29/6 (2003), 937–61.

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

279

The RBV has been expanded to include entrepreneurship as a unique resource of the firm.14 According to this approach, characteristics that are related to entrepreneurship can be considered as resources of the firm. Entrepreneurial alertness, entrepreneurial knowledge and the ability to coordinate resources are aspects of entrepreneurship that can be analysed as unique resources. In this context, the entrepreneurship theory considers the entrepreneur as the main human resource that the firm possesses, while the RBV sees the entrepreneur as one of the resources that the company is able to exploit to create competitive advantage. 3

Human Resources and Entrepreneurship in Greek-Owned Shipping

Entrepreneurship is usually examined as the personal competency that leads to the creation of a new business. In the context of this chapter, it is also examined as a resource that is available to the firm and can be exploited during the different courses of its lifecycle, or as a resource that can explain the development of shipping firms and shipping nations. Two leading figures of maritime economics, S. Svendsen and B. Metaxas, have included entrepreneurship in their analyses as a factor that leads to competitiveness. Svendsen addressed the question of whether there exists a tradition of the continuous appearance of shipping entrepreneurs in certain maritime nations, and if it exists, what are the reasons for this existence; Metaxas considered entrepreneurship as one of the factors that has contributed to the development of Greek shipping.15 In fact, the emphasis on entrepreneurship as a specific resource is due to its vital contribution to the formation of the sustainable competitive advantage of Greek shipping companies.16 To make this contribution clear, the entrepreneurial structure of the fleet and the patterns for the transition of employees to entrepreneurs need to be discussed. The continuous development of the Greek-owned fleet over the last fifty years was accompanied by the continuous increase in the number of shipping companies. This is the structural characteristic that contributed to the dynamic development of the fleet. Data contained in Table 12.1 below reveal the rapid increase of companies of all sizes. From 369 companies in 1969, 14 15 16

Sharon A. Alvarez and Lowell W. Busenitz, ‘The Entrepreneurship of Resource-based Theory’, Journal of Management 27 (2001), 755–75. See Basil N. Metaxas, Principles of Maritime Economics (Athens: Papazisis, 1988) and Stromme Svendsen, ‘The Role of the Entrepreneur in the Shipping Industry. Editorial’, Maritime Policy and Management 8/3 (1981), 137–40. Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’.

280

Theotokas

which managed a fleet of almost twenty-seven million gross registered tonnage, to 758 companies in 2010 with 152 million grt. The dynamism of Greek-owned shipping itself stems from maritime entrepreneurship and the ability of the Greeks to renew and expand the number of shipping companies.17 The group that marked the development of the Greek-owned shipping during the last decades is that of companies of small size created by shipowners that entered business after the 1960s.18 They have been the breeding ground for the most dynamic and fast-growing companies of today. Despite the adverse conditions in the business environment, small family firms will continue to support the development of the Greek-owned fleet.19 Table 12.1 The size of Greek-owned shipping companies (1969–2010)

Year

1969 1975 1981 1985 1990 2000 2005 2010

Small (1–4 ships)

Medium (5–15 ships)

Large (16 + ships)

Number %

Number

%

Number %

268 488 522 346 361 565 445 511

78 107 124 113 131 225 183 183

21.1 16.7 17.5 21.9 23.9 27 26.5 24.1

23 46 64 57 56 45 62 64

72.6 76.1 73.5 67 65.9 67.6 64.5 67.4

6.3 7.2 9 11.1 10.2 5.4 9 8.5

Total GreekNumber owned fleet (,000 grt)

369 641 710 516 548 835 690 758

26,932 48,928 54,317 46,908 49,233 90,277 109,377 152,616

Note: For 1975 and 1990 categorisation is based on the registered tonnage of the companies, while for the years 2000, 2005 and 2010 it is based on the number of ships managed. Source: Shipping company data for years 1969, 1975, 1981, 1985 and 1990 in I. Theotokas, ‘Organizational and Managerial Patterns of Greek-owned Shipping Companies, 1969–1990’ (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Piraeus, 1997) [in Greek]. For 2000, T. Petropoulos, ‘Greek Shipping: The Latest Trends’, Lloyd’s Shipping Economist 22/6 (2000), 11–14, for 2005 and for 2010 see www.theseanation.gr according to data published by Petrofin Research. Greek-owned fleet data for years 1969, 1975, 1981, 1985 and 1990, Naftika Chronika, various issues and for 2000, 2005 and 2010, Lloyds Register-Fairplay in www.nee.gr

17 18 19

Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’. Theotokas and Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping. Thanopoulou and Theotokas, ‘Small Firms in a Global Industry: The Case of Greek Shipping (1974–2004)’, Economic Policy Studies 10 (2007), 107–27.

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

281

The vast increase in the number of shipping companies is owed to the establishment of new firms that were created by three groups of entrepreneurs:20 Former ship officers and employees of shipping companies were the main groups of new entrants in the shipping business. Data provided by Theotokas and Harlaftis drawn from a sample of 144 families active in the international markets for more than thirty years reveal that of the seventy-nine companies that were established by non-traditional shipowners, thirty-one (39%) were created by ex ship officers and twenty-two (28%) by employees of shipping companies.21 The second group includes entrepreneurs that were already active in other sectors of the economy (merchants, industrialists and others), who decided to expand their activities by investing in the acquisition of ships. They represent the 33% of newcomers to Greek-owned shipping. The third group of entrepreneurs that created new firms during this period consisted of members of ship-owning families who left the family business to create their own firm. Out of the sample of 144 families mentioned above, seventy-two involved cases of fragmentation – that is, a member (or members) of the family left the family business to establish a new shipping company. While these three groups had much in common, they also had significant differences related to the resources they possessed. In most cases, the first group of new entrants possessed limited capital, which meant that the choices they had with regard to the ship they would acquire were limited. They usually started their business by purchasing a ship of age, often by getting the additional finance from the owner of these ships.22 At the same time they possessed intangible resources they could use to overcome the lack of tangible ones. They were able to build on their vast basis of tacit knowledge for operating and managing ships, which constituted the basis for the development of distinct capabilities in their companies, which in turn allowed for the profitable operation of ships. As will be analysed in the next section, this was a critical success factor for companies that managed second-hand ships of high operational cost, a disadvantage that in most cases was the main reason for their sale by their previous owners. Their tacit knowledge of the market mechanisms and of the operation of the ships is considered as the factor that defined their choice to become maritime entrepreneurs.23 Their ability to make use of the social capital they had developed during their careers as ship officers also

20 21 22 23

Theotokas and Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping. Theotokas and Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping. Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’. Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’.

282

Theotokas

contributed to this choice;24 this proved to be a resource that helped them obtain access to other resources needed for starting up.25 The resource in abundance for the second group of new entrants to the market was the capital for the acquisition of the ship. However, they lacked the required knowledge of the operation of the ships, a factor that in many instances defined the prospects of their company.26 Indeed, many firms created by investors of this group bankrupted within a short period of time, usually during periods of crisis in the freight markets. On the contrary, members of ship-owning families that formed the third group possessed both the tangible and the intangible resources for the creation of their own business. They were able to get the proper finance, make use of their knowledge of the operation of the ships and exploit their social capital for their own business.27 4

Seafarers and Competitiveness

Greece is a traditional maritime nation with a strong share in the global seafaring labour market. Seafarers were the resource in abundance, the resource that allowed investments in the acquisition of second-hand ships that were labour-intensive. This is the main reason that Greek seafarers during the different courses of development of Greek-owned shipping are considered as the main factor for the competitiveness of the ships. There are a limited number of studies that examine this contribution,28 and other studies that include aspects of this issue in their analysis.29 For the understanding of seafarers’ 24

25 26 27 28

29

The social capital is considered as a factor that defines one’s potential to become an entrepreneur, while the knowledge related to the previous working experience affects the choice of the sector where the investment will be made. See Constance E. Helfat and Marvin B. Lieberman, ‘The Birth of Capabilities: Market Entry and the Importance of Pre-history’, Industrial and Corporate Change 11/4 (2002), 725–60. Social capital is a resource that can facilitate access to other resources. See Angelo S. DeNisi, Michael A. Hitt and Susan E. Jackson, ‘The Knowledge-based Approach to Sustainable Competitive Advantage’ in Susan E. Jackson, Michael A. Hitt and Angelo S. DeNisi (eds), Managing Knowledge for Sustained Competitive Advantage: Designing Strategies for Effective Human Resource Management (San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 2003), 3–33. Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’ and Theotokas et al., Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness. Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’. Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’. Harlaftis et al., ‘Το παρόν και το μέλλον της Ελληνικής ναυτιλίας’ [Greek Shipping: Current Trends and Future Prospects]; Theotokas et al., Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness; A. Korres, Greek Seafaring Labour (Athens: Institute of Economic and Industrial Research, 1978). Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping; Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’; Evangelos Sambracos and Joanna Tsiaparikou, ‘Sea-going Labour and Greek Owned

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

283

contributions to the development of the fleet, the specific context of Greek shipping in the post-war period has to be taken into account. This context is characterised by the existence of traditional and non-traditional firms whose differences are related not only to the years of presence in the international markets or the stage of their firms’ lifecycles, but also to the available resources. While the traditional shipping firms usually possessed the capital needed for the development of the fleet, even for placing orders for new buildings, the non-traditional firms that lacked the needed capital entered the market by acquiring only second-hand ships.30 These ships proved a labour-intensive investment: their competitiveness was based on the competencies of the people on board. The RBV provides the analytical framework for the understanding of the role of Greek seafarers in the competitiveness of the firms. For the majority of the firms that were the result of the entrepreneurial aspiration of an employee – either ship officer or office employee – to enter the market during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the physical and the organisational resources were limited. The limited capital was accumulated either with the contributions of relatives and friends, in many instances as a share in the ownership of the ship or with the provision of a loan from the seller of the ship or a shipping bank. In addition, the limited organisational resources led the majority of shipowners to assign the management of the commercial management of the ship to a shipping office in London or Piraeus.31 The resources that could easily be found were the human resources. Apart from entrepreneurship, which was the resource that the founder of the firm possessed, the firm could employ experienced seafarers who possessed a basis of intangible knowledge. This was also the basis for the development of know-how on the technical operation of the ship that allowed seafarers to turn the operation of the second-hand ship into a profitable one. Thus, even the newly founded firms could obtain resources that could lead to the creation of competitive advantage. Greek seafarers continue to the present day to contribute to the competitiveness of the firms, even where these firms operate newly built ships. This is evident from the fact that the majority of ships, even those that fly flags other

30

31

Fleet: A Major Aspect of Fleet Competitiveness’, Maritime Policy and Management 28/1 (2001), 55–69; Theotokas and Progoulaki, ‘Seafarers as a Strategic Resource of Shipping Companies’; Theotokas and Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping. Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Organizational and Managerial Patterns of Greek-owned Shipping Companies and the Internationalization Process from the Post-war Period to 1990’ in David Starkey and Gelina Harlaftis, Global Markets: The Internationalization of the Sea Transport Industries since 1850, Research in Maritime History, no. 14 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 1998), 303–18; Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’. Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping.

284

Theotokas

than the Greek one, employ a number of Greek seafarers, despite the fact that the manning cost of this choice is higher for the firms. Theotokas et al.32 employ the VRIO framework33 in their analysis of the contribution of Greek seafarers to the competitiveness of the Greek-owned fleet; this is based on the RBV of the firm. The VRIO framework realises that there are four preconditions for the exploitation of the potential contribution of the human resources to the sustainable competitiveness of the firm: the Value, the Rareness, the Imitability and the Organisation. Value refers to the ability of the employees to create value for the company either by reducing the cost or by increasing the income, rareness is related to the competitors’ limited ability to have access to these resources, imitability is related to competitors’ inability to imitate the characteristics that human resources use while they perform their tasks, and finally, organisation refers to the way the firm organises and manages its human resources, which defines its ability to gain the advantages that their valuable, rare and inimitable characteristics might create. Greek seafarers create value for the shipping firms by contributing to cost reduction through their wages, their knowledge and performance, or their commitment to the goals of the firm; all these means can lead to cost savings in the maintenance of the ships or the minimisation of claims or income increases through the minimisation of days the ship will go off hire. Especially in periods of low freight rates, this contribution might prove crucial for the survival of a shipping company.34 At the same time, Greek seafarers are considered as employees that are characterised by team spirit, the ability to take the proper initiatives and creativity and seamanship, which are characteristics that cannot be found in all seafarers; even when they do exist, they can be manifested and become worthy under certain conditions that exist in the working environment and act as motivational factors. With regard to the imitability of the competencies of human resources, this condition is related to phenomena such as trust, loyalty and adoption of the company’s identity, which are facilitated by the permanent employment that allows career advancements and explains the increased productivity.35 Characteristics related to value, rareness and imitability conditions appear in a more intensive way in companies that have developed systems that favour trust, stable employment, career advancement and the increased satisfaction of employees. These systems that allow ‘human resource characteristics to bear the fruit of their potential 32 33 34 35

Theotokas et al., Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness. Jay B. Barney, ‘Looking Inside for Competitive Advantage’, Academy of Management Executive 9/4 (1995), 49–61. Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’. Harlaftis, A History of Greek-owned Shipping; Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’.

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

285

advantage’, according to Barney and Wright,36 were applied to the management of Greek seafarers by many Greek-owned shipping companies.37 In the framework proposed by Peteraf, four conditions underlie sustained competitive advantage.38 These conditions are the heterogeneity of resources within an industry, ex post limits to competition, imperfect resource mobility and ex ante limits to competition. The ex post limits to competition and the imperfect resource mobility are conditions that could be employed for the analysis of Greek seafarers’ contribution to the sustainable competitiveness of the fleet. These conditions are related to the limited ability of Greek seafarers to be employed on ships not contracted with the seamen’s national pension fund (NAT) – that is, the limited ability of Greek seafarers, especially officers, to be employed on non-Greek-owned ships.39 This limited ability is related to the fact that if a Greek seafarer is employed on ships not contracted with the pension fund, he/she is obliged to pay the contributions of both employee and employer to the national pension fund in order to have the right to get a pension from the NAT and be promoted to a higher rank (if he/she is an officer). It has been proposed that in a globalised seafarers’ labour market, which is characterised by extended mobility, the seafarers’ labour market regime in Greece, and especially the regime that is related to the social security system, creates a national monopsony of shipowners over Greek seafarers, since they face serious disincentives to seeking and getting employment on ships under a non-Greek flag, not contracted with NAT.40 During the first decades of the twentieth century, the majority of the Greek seafarers came from the Greek islands. Data presented in Table 12.2 reveal that during the interwar period almost two-thirds of Greek seafarers originated from the islands. The rapid growth of the Greek-owned fleet led to the vast increase of the number of seafarers, which increased almost eight-fold between 1930 and 1959. The population of the islands could not easily provide the number of seafarers needed to man the ever-increasing number of ships of the Greek-owned fleet, which meant that employees from other areas of Greece were recruited. Thus, the percentage of seafarers coming from the islands gradually reduced: to 49% in 1959, 36% in 1980 and almost 30% in 36 37 38 39 40

Jay B. Barney and Patrick M. Wright, ‘On Becoming a Strategic Partner: The Role of Human Resources in Gaining Competitive Advantage’, Human Resource Management 37/1 (1998), 35. Theotokas and Progoulaki, ‘Seafarers as a Strategic Resource of Shipping Companies’. Margaret A. Peteraf, ‘The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage: A Resource-based View’, Strategic Management Journal 14 (1993), 179–88. Theotokas et al., Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness. Ioannis Tsamourgelis, ‘Employment Practices and Greek Shipping Competitiveness’ in Pallis, Maritime Transport, 121–70.

286

Theotokas

2008. At the same time, the respective percentages of seafarers from Athens and other areas of Greece increased. Despite the vast increase in the number of seafarers during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the rapid increase in the registered tonnage and in the number of ships in the Greek-owned fleet led to a shortage of seafarers.41 This shortage led Greek-owned shipping companies to turn their attention to new labour markets for seafarers. The turn was facilitated by the action of the Greek state to sign bilateral agreements with nations that supplied international shipping with low-cost seafaring labour. Initially, the motive for the turn to new labour markets for seafarers was the need to recruit the necessary number of seafarers for the expanding fleet. In the years that followed, many shipping companies realised that the employment of seafarers from low-cost countries led to a reduction in manning cost, a fact that became a motive for gradually substituting the Greek seafarers with seafarers from those countries. The adoption of this practice from a continually increasing number of Greek-owned shipping companies was facilitated by the conditions created by the crises in the international freight markets during the 1980s. Indeed, as can be seen in Table 12.3, the reduction in the number of Greek seafarers started in 1982, when the markets collapsed. From this year onwards, the trend continued almost uninterrupted. With the exception of the years 1984, 1994 and 2002, the number of Greek seafarers was decreasing: from 59,534 in 1980 to 15,721 in 2008. The gradual substitution of Greeks by foreigner seafarers led to the decrease of their share in the total number of seafarers from 64.8% to 55.3% in the same years. Table 12.2 Place of origin of Greek seafarers, 1930, 1959, 1980, 1998, 2006

Location 1930 Islandsa Athens Rest of Greece Total

5,347 895 1,793

%

1959

%

66 31,638 11 11,550 23 21,001

1980

49 21,558 18 14,371 33 23,605

%

1998

36 6,859 24 5,753 40 7,893

%

2006

%

33.5 4,809 29.7 28.1 5,131 31.7 38.4 6,242 38.6

8,035 100 64,179 100 59,534 100 20,505 100

16,182 100

a Includes Ionian Islands, Cyclades, Dodecanese, Crete, Lesvos, Chios, Samos. Sources: For 1930, 1959 and 1980, G. Harlaftis, Ιστορία της Ελληνόκτητης Ναυτιλίας [History of Greek-owned Shipping, 19th–20th Century] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001), Table 11.4; for 1998, ESYE, Seafarer Statistics 1998 (Athens, 1999), Table 23; and for 2006, ESYE, Seafarer Statistics 2006 (Athens, 2007), Table 26. 41

Korres, Greek Seafaring Labour.

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

287

In the literature on Greek seafarers, numerous factors are analysed to explain the decrease in their numbers.42 Harlaftis et al. add the following to the factors that primarily contributed to this:43 – Decrease in the number of ships and in the registered tonnage of the Greek flag and respective increase in Greek-owned ships registered in flags of convenience. While onboard the Greek-flagged ships, a minimum number of Greeks should be employed; there is no such limitation for the flags of convenience. As already mentioned, those shipping companies that sought to reduce their manning cost transferred their ships to flags of convenience. In 1980 the percentage of Greek flags in the Greek-owned fleet was 77.2%. In 2010 this percentage was reduced to 34.9%. – A continuous decrease in the number of Greeks on the minimum manning scheme of Greek-flagged ships. In order to either boost or protect the competitiveness of the Greek-flagged ships and to provide incentives to the shipping companies to register more ships under the Greek flag, governments implemented policies that led to the reduction of the manning cost of the ships through the continuous decrease of the minimum number of Greeks and the respective increase of the number of foreign seafarers. While during the early 1980s 75% of the crew – that is, more than fifteen seafarers – should be Greeks, after 2006 this number reduced to four, five or six, depending on the tonnage of the ship. – During the decades after World War II, when the employment opportunities for a wide percentage of the population were not abundant, working as a seafarer promised a career with many advantages. After 1980 this situation changed. The employment opportunities onshore increased, while at the same time the seafaring profession, because of the de-flagging of ships and the crises in the market, was not as secure as in the past. The increase in the seafarers’ unemployment during the 1980s was a factor that discouraged many young people from following a maritime career. – Limited ability of Greek seafarers to be employed on ships not linked with the national pension fund, a factor analysed in the previous section of the chapter.

42 43

See, for example, Korres, Greek Seafaring Labour; Sambracos and Tsiaparikou, ‘Sea-going Labour and Greek Owned Fleet’; Theotokas et al., Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness. Harlaftis et al., ‘Το παρόν και το μέλλον της Ελληνικής ναυτιλίας’ [Greek Shipping: Current Trends and Future Prospects].

288

Theotokas

Table 12.3 Greek and Foreign seafarers on Greek and Greek-owned (linked with the National Pension Fund)

Year

Total number Greeks

Foreign

Percentage of Greeks in total

Percentage of foreigners in total

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

86,269 91,872 52,561 49,184 37,830 37,367 36,851 38,995 39,122 36,766 33,669 29,385 32,926 30,920 29,260 26,893

28,236 32,338 12,094 8,464 5,490 8,632 10,085 13,717 13,280 12,774 13,164 10,935 14,179 13,023 13,078 11,172

67.3% 64.8% 77.0% 82.8% 85.5% 76.9% 72.6% 64.8% 66.1% 65.3% 60.9% 62.8% 56.9% 57.9% 55.3% 58.5%

32.7% 35.2% 23.0% 17.2% 14.5% 23.1% 27.4% 35.2% 33.9% 34.7% 39.1% 37.2% 43.1% 42.1% 44.7% 41.5%

58,033 59,534 40,467 40,720 32,340 28,735 26,766 25,278 25,842 23,992 20,505 18,450 18,747 17,897 16,182 15,721

Sources: For 1978–2006 http://www.yen.gr/wide/yen.chtm?prnbr=25166, for 2008, ESYE, Statistics of Greek Shipping (Piraeus, 2011), Table 4

5

The Shipping Offices’ Employees

For the assessment of the contribution of human resources to the competitiveness of Greek-owned shipping, the analysis should include the employees of the offices of the shipping companies. This is not irrelevant to the fact that the majority of this category of employees were ex ship officers who were employed in positions related to the technical management of the ships – that is, they had the knowledge and experience that were the preconditions for getting these jobs. The recruitment of ex ship officers for the onshore positions of the Greekowned companies was boosted by the prevailing entrepreneurial philosophy and culture of the majority of the companies.44 As analysed in the third 44

Theotokas, ‘On Top of World Shipping’.

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

289

section of this chapter, the former ship officers were the main group of new entrants to the markets in the second half of the twentieth century. The ship officers that became shipowners preferred to staff their firms with employees with the same mentality and professional culture as them. It was a matter of trust and understanding. Thus, the key personnel of the newly formed firms belonged to this category – that is, during the stages of existence and survival of the firms, the prevailing group were the ex ship officers.45 During the stages of success and the take-off, when the company had its fleet and the number of employees increased, which means that an internal labour market had been created, transfer of a ship officer from a ship to a shore position was part of the non-formal human resources management system they implemented: the potential for transfer to an office position acted as an important incentive for increased performance for the officers that wished to get such a position, and at the same time it acted as a motive for the retention of the qualified officers within the company. Apart from contributing to the enhancement of the organisational culture of the companies, this pattern for the staffing of the companies had another important contribution related to the creation and dissemination of knowledge. The ship officers that were transferred into office positions brought in the working culture of the ships as well as the knowledge they gained or developed during their sea service. They transferred and disseminated to the office employees tacit knowledge related to the technical operation of the ships, enhancing the know-how of the company in this field. In parallel, ex ship officers working as ship operators or superintended engineers were able to transfer their vast experience to the captains or the engineers of the ships they managed. Thus, their transfer to onshore positions was the basis for the expansion of the knowledge base of the firm on the technical operation of the ships  – that is, the core of their competitive advantage. Although during the last few years the reorganisation of many shipping firms led them to describe in a more accurate way the onshore positions that demand sea experience and knowledge of the ship, which led to an increase in positions staffed with university-educated employees,46 ex ship officers remain the key personnel for the technical management of the ships.

45 46

For the growth stages of a small business, see Neil C. Churchill and Virginia L. Lewis, ‘The Five Stages of Small Business Growth’, Harvard Business Review 61/3 (1983), 31–42. One should take into account that the increased demand for university-educated employees led to the creation during the 1990s of two university departments that offer a maritime curriculum.

290 6

Theotokas

Conclusions

The aim of this chapter was to analyse the crucial role of human resources in the competitiveness of Greek-owned shipping companies. The paper adopted the resource-based view of the firm to analyse the human resources contribution to the level of maritime entrepreneurship and the level of employees onboard the ships and ashore. The vast increase in the number of shipping companies, which is attributed to the entrepreneurial aspirations of a large number of ship officers and shipping companies’ employees, as well as of members of ship-owning families who left the family business to create their own firm, manifests the role of human resources and maritime entrepreneurship in the development of the fleet. On the employment side, during the first decades of the twentieth century the seafarers were the resource in abundance that allowed shipping companies to overcome disadvantages related to the availability of capital and to create the basis for the formation of sustainable competitive advantage. They were able to purchase second-hand ships that were labour-intensive investments. The role of seafarers was crucial for the cost-effective operation of these ships. When they were employed ashore in positions related to the technical management of the ships, they were able to transfer and disseminate their experiences, broadening the knowledge base of the shipping companies. The statistics on Greek seafarers show the decrease in their number and their gradual substitution by foreign seafarers from low-cost countries. However, this trend might call into question the ability of the Greek shipping companies to retain the competitive advantage that comes from the cost-effective technical management of the ships. It is this advantage of the Greek-owned shipping firms that makes the need for the preservation and the enlargement of the supply of seafaring labour in Greece imperative. The supply of a sufficient number of Greek seafarers is a precondition not only for the recruitment of Greek-flagged ships, but also for staffing the onshore offices of the shipping firms with experienced employees.47 A lack of these human resources might entail the risk of interruption of the transfer and dissemination of tacit knowledge, which has proved to be the basis for the cost-effective technical management of the ships.

47

Relevant experience is found in the case of UK seafarers. See Stephen J. Pettit et al., ‘Ex-seafarers Shore-based Employment: The Current UK Situation’, Marine Policy 29 (2005), 521–31.

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

291

Bibliography Alvarez Sharon A. and Lowell W. Busenitz, ‘The Entrepreneurship of Resource-based Theory’, Journal of Management 27 (2001), 755–75. Barney Jay B., ‘Resource-based Theories of Competitive Advantage: A Ten-year Retrospective on the Resource-based View’, Journal of Management 27 (2001), 643–50. Barney Jay B. and Patrick M. Wright, ‘On Becoming a Strategic Partner: The Role of Human Resources in Gaining Competitive Advantage’, Human Resource Management 37/1 (1998), 31–46. Barney Jay B., ‘Looking Inside for Competitive Advantage’, Academy of Management Executive 9/4 (1995), 49–61. Barney Jay B., ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Management 17/1 (1991), 99–120. Churchill Neil C. and Virginia L. Lewis, ‘The Five Stages of Small Business Growth’, Harvard Business Review 61/3 (1983), 31–42. De Oliveira Wilk Eduardo and Jaime Evaldo Fensterseifer, ‘Use of Resource-based View in Industrial Cluster Strategic Analysis’, International Journal of Operations & Production Management 23/9 (2003), 995–1009. DeNisi Angelo S., Michael A. Hitt and Susan E. Jackson, ‘The Knowledge-based Approach to Sustainable Competitive Advantage’ in Susan E. Jackson, Michael A. Hitt and Angelo S. DeNisi (eds), Managing Knowledge for Sustained Competitive Advantage: Designing Strategies for Effective Human Resource Management (San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 2003), 3–33. ESYE, Seafarer Statistics 1998 (Athens, 1999). ESYE, Seafarer Statistics 2006 (Athens, 2007). Galbreath Jeremy, ‘Which Resources Matter the Most to Firm Success? An Explanatory Study of Resource-based Theory’, Technovation 25 (2005), 979–87. Grant Robert M., The Contemporary Strategy Analysis (Oxford: John Wiley and Sons, 1998). Hall Richard, ‘The Strategic Analysis of Intangible Resources’, Strategic Management Journal 13 (1993), 135–44. Harlaftis Gelina, Helen A. Thanopoulou and Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Το παρόν και το μέλλον της Ελληνικής ναυτιλίας’ [Greek Shipping: Current Trends and Future Prospects], Academy of Athens, Office of Economic Research, Study no. 10 (Athens, 2009). Harlaftis Gelina, Ιστορία της Ελληνόκτητης Ναυτιλίας [History of Greek-owned Shipping, 19th–20th Century] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001). Harlaftis Gelina, A History of Greek-owned Shipping (London: Routledge, 1996). Harlaftis Gelina, Greek Shipowners, the Economy and the State (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1993).

292

Theotokas

Helfat Constance E. and Margaret A. Peteraf, ‘The Dynamic Resource-based View: Capability Lifecycles’, Strategic Management Journal 24 (2003), 997–1010. Helfat Constance E. and Marvin B. Lieberman, ‘The Birth of Capabilities: Market Entry and the Importance of Pre-history’, Industrial and Corporate Change 11/4 (2002), 725–60. Korres A., Greek Seafaring Labour (Athens: Institute of Economic and Industrial Research, 1978). Lagoudis Ioannis N. and Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Competitive Advantage in the Greek Shipping Industry: A Supply Chain Management Approach’ in Athanasios Pallis, Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm, Research in Transportation Economics, vol. 21 (London: Elsevier, 2007). Leiblein Michael J., ‘The Choice of Organizational Governance Form and Performance: Predictions from Transaction Cost, Resource-based and Real Options Theories’, Journal of Management 29/6 (2003), 937–61. Mathews John A., ‘Competitive Dynamics and Economic Learning: An Extended Resource-based View’, Industrial and Corporate Change 12/1 (2003), 115–45. Mathews John A., ‘A Resource-based View of Schumpeterian Economic Dynamics’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 12 (2002), 29–54. Metaxas Basil N., Principles of Maritime Economics (Athens: Papazisis, 1988). Petropoulos T., ‘Greek Shipping: The Latest Trends’, Lloyd’s Shipping Economist 22/6 (2000), 11–14. Pettit Stephen J. et al., ‘Ex-seafarers Shore-based Employment: The Current UK Situation’, Marine Policy 29 (2005), 521–31. Sambracos Evangelos and Joanna Tsiaparikou, ‘Sea-going Labour and Greek Owned Fleet: A Major Aspect of Fleet Competitiveness’, Maritime Policy and Management 28/1 (2001), 55–69. Stromme Svendsen, ‘The Role of the Entrepreneur in the Shipping Industry. Editorial’, Maritime Policy and Management 8/3 (1981), 137–40. Tenold Stig and Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Shipping Innovation: The Different Paths of Greece and Norway’, International Journal of Decision Science, Risk and Management 5/2 (2013), 142–60. Thanopoulou Helen A., Ioannis Theotokas and Anastasia Constantelou, ‘Leading by Following: Innovation and Post-war Strategies of Greek Shipowners’, International Journal of Maritime History 22/2 (2010), 199–255. Thanopoulou Helen and Ioannis Theotokas, ‘Small Firms in a Global Industry: The Case of Greek Shipping (1974–2004)’, Economic Policy Studies 10 (2007), 107–27. Thanopoulou Helen, Greek and International Shipping (Athens: Papazisis, 1994). Theotokas Ioannis and Gelina Harlaftis, Leadership in World Shipping (London: Palgrave, 2009).

Greek Shipping in the Twentieth Century

293

Theotokas Ioannis et al., Greek Shipping, Employment and Competitiveness (Athens: Gutenberg, 2008). Theotokas Ioannis and Maria Progoulaki, ‘Seafarers as a Strategic Resource of Shipping Companies: The Greek Context’, International Association of Maritime Economist (IAME) Annual Conference (Athens, 2007). Theotokas Ioannis, ‘On Top of World Shipping: Greek Shipping Companies’ Organization and Management’ in Athanasios Pallis, Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm, Research in Transportation Economics, vol. 21 (London: Elsevier, 2007). Theotokas Ioannis, ‘Organizational and Managerial Patterns of Greek-owned Shipping Companies and the Internationalization Process from the Post-war Period to 1990’ in David Starkey and Gelina Harlaftis, Global Markets: The Internationalization of the Sea Transport Industries since 1850, Research in Maritime History, no. 14 (St John’s, Newfoundland: IMEHA, 1998), 303–18. Theotokas Ioannis, ‘Organizational and Managerial Patterns of Greek-owned Shipping Companies, 1969–1990’ (PhD thesis, University of Piraeus, 1997) [in Greek]. Tsamourgelis Ioannis, ‘Employment Practices and Greek Shipping Competitiveness’ in Athanasios Pallis, Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm, Research in Trans­ portation Economics, vol. 21 (London: Elsevier, 2007).

Chapter 13

The Development of Naval History in Greece, 1989–2020 Zisis Fotakis 1

Prologue

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 ushered in, among many other things, a new era during which the study of war has been boosted internationally. In an attempt to provide an account of the study of modern naval history in Greece since then, this paper adopts a ‘broad definition of military history that encompasses not just history of war and wars, but that includes any historical study in which military personnel of all sorts, warfare (the way in which conflicts are actually fought on land, at sea and in the air) military institutions, and their various intersections with politics, economics, society, nature and culture …’1 Within this context, it sketches relevant contributions from Greek institutions (the Greek Ministry of Defence, museums, archival centres, universities, and so on) and presents the main trends of Greek naval historiography both on the scholarly and popular history levels in the light of corresponding international developments.2 2

Introduction

‘Military history … the oldest form of historical writing in many cultures’3 a fact that has been aptly demonstrated by Herodotus and Thucydides, as well as Homer, if one considers the Iliad as a form of military history writing. Since then, many things have changed, and the community of Greek professional historians has not been particularly interested in the study of modern naval history since the end of the Cold War. This may be attributed to the suspicion 1 Stephen Morillo and Michael Pavkovic, What is Military History? 2nd ed. (Cambridge, UK and Madden, MA: Polity, 2013), 3. 2 For practical reasons, this study is based only on post-1988 books which were written and published by Greeks in Greece, unless otherwise stated. It neither includes editions of earlier publications, nor the considerable number of Greek translations of foreign books on naval history. Also, the bibliographical notes of this study are not exhaustive, since they are intended to serve as a guide to recent publications, some of which have excellent bibliographies. 3 Morillo and Pavkovic, What is Military History, 2. © Zisis Fotakis, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_014

The Development of Naval History in Greece

295

‘that to write about war is somehow to approve of it, even to glorify it – a suspicion not unfounded in the history of the writing of military history’.4 The naval historian’s avoidance of theoretical complexity, the overwhelming maleness of naval historians as a group and their linkage with right wing agendas in many left wing historians’ minds may also be responsible for the relative marginalisation of this field of study.5 The unpopularity of modern naval history within Greek academia makes better sense considering that the Rankean empiricism and confidence in objective truth of naval historians seems outdated vis-à-vis post modernism and other currents that have fundamentally changed the quest for historical understanding.6 The development in Greece of an operational naval history which would have emphasised the roles of contingency, chance and even chaos on historical development could have increased its popularity in Greek academia. For this to happen, questions of culture (naval and civic, sociology and group psychology), systemic factors, the uncertainty of the battlefield, the ever-present problems of information gathering and sharing, and the inherently asymmetric nature of war7 should be further incorporated into the corresponding Greek academic literature. The study of modern naval history in Greece has not fallen into the same type of obscurity as other academically unfashionable subjects. As is the case with the American public, it is popular among the Greeks, rendering it attractive for some academic and several commercial presses.8 Yet that very popularity means that there are many types of naval history and a comparatively large number of publications.9 Indeed, it has been possible to trace about 250 Greek studies of naval history since 1989. The continued interest in modern naval 4 Morillo and Pavkovic, What is Military History, 2. 5 Donald Yerxa, Recent Themes in Military History: Historians in Conversation (Columbia, SC: The University of South Carolina Press, 2008), 1. Iliou Filippos, ‘Ιστοριογραφικές Ανανεώσεις, το Βιβλίο, οι Αναγνώστες, η Ανάγνωση: το ποσοτικό στο τρίτο επίπεδο’ [Historiographical Renewals: The Book, the Readers, and the Reading: Quantity in the Third Level], in Paschalis Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 1 (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 398. Vassilis Panagiotopoulos, Η Αριστερή Ιστοριογραφία για την Ελληνική Επανάσταση [Τhe Leftist Historiography of the Greek War of Independence] in Paschalis Kitromilidis and Triantaphyllos Sklavenitis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας, 1833–1922 [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece, 1833–1922], vol. 1 (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004) 568. 6 Robert Citino, ‘Military Histories Old and New: A Reintroduction’, The American Historical Review 112/4 (2007), 1079. 7 Mark Moyar, ‘The Current State of Military History’, The Historical Journal 50 (2007), 227. 8 Moyar, ‘The Current State of Military History’, 225. 9 Morillo and Pavkovic, What is Military History, 2.

296

Fotakis

history in this country makes better sense if the relevant work of the Greek Ministry of Defence is also taken into consideration. 3

The Greek Ministry of Defence, Its Associated Bodies and Greek Naval History Since 1989

The Greek Ministry of Defence maintains several bodies whose mission is the furtherance of the study of naval history in Greece. These are the Hellenic National Defence General Staff – incorporating the Hellenic Commission on Military History and the Hellenic Navy General Staff – and the Navy History Service.10 The study of naval history is further cultivated by the Hellenic Naval Academy of the Ministry of Defence. The Hellenic Commission on Military History has represented Greece in the International Commission of Military History (ICMH) since 1985 and hosted the twenty-second and the twenty-seventh congresses of the ICMH in Athens in 1987 and 2001, respectively. It has also co-organised several international conferences and workshops11 and has participated in a fraction of the international congresses and symposia since 1989. Most of this work has appeared in English, providing a good starting point for anyone who is interested in the study of war in modern Greece, including that of naval history.12 10 11

12

Hellenic National Defence General Staff, Armed Forces Entities on Military History (Athens: Hellenic Commission on Military History [HCMH], 2007). International Symposium ‘Lefkos Pyrgos 91’, International Symposium ‘Lato 91’, International Symposium ‘Moudros 92’, International Symposium ‘Pavlos Melas 92’, Twelfth Annual Congress PfP Consortium of Defense Colleges, Warsaw, 2010 and four Hellenic – Israeli seminars between 2001 and 2006. See, among others, HCMH Acta of the Twenty-second Congress of the ICMH, 1987 (Athens, 1988). HCMH, Acta of the Twenty-seventh Congress of the ICMH (Athens, 2002). HCMH, Acta of the International Symposium on Military History Lefkos Pyrgos 91 and Lato 91 (Athens, 1991). HCMH, Acta of the International Symposium of Military History ‘Moundros 92’ – ‘Pavlos Melas 92’. The Great National Sally 1912–13: The First Balkan War (Athens, 1992). HCMH, The Eastern Question, the Greeks and the Romanians (1880–1923) (Athens, 2001). HCMH, Acta of the Hellenic – Israeli Seminar of 2004: Asymmetric Threats (Athens, 2004). HCMH, The Russian – Greek Military Relationship from the Antiquity to Nowadays (Athens, 2004). HCMH, Acta of the Conference Development and Exploitation on Military History Lessons in the Area of Eastern Mediteranean (Athens, 2006). Anastasios Dimitrakopoulos (ed.), Ο Πρώτος Βαλκανικός Πόλεμος μέσα από τις σελίδες του περιοδικού L’Illustration [The First Balkan War as Narrated in the French Journal L’Illustration] (Athens: Hellenic Committee of Military History henceforth HCMH, 1992). For more information, see Hellenic National Defence General Staff, Armed Forces Entities on Military History, 9–12. Eupraxia Paschalidou, Η Διαχρονική Πορεία της Διακλαδικότητας [Interservice Co-operation across History] (Athens: HCMH, 2008).

The Development of Naval History in Greece

297

Following its reorganisation in 1998, the Navy History Service catalogued electronically most of its archival collections, and their digitalisation is now advanced.13 It has also undertaken an oral history programme, the fruits of which appear promising.14 Despite the fact that the chronological coverage of this programme is necessarily limited, it is being seen in Greece, like in most of the West, ‘as an aspect of recollection that provides a key guide to what war is like’.15 The oral history programme of the Navy History Service may also fill a considerable gap in our knowledge of twentieth-century Greek naval history, since some of the corresponding naval records were deliberately burnt or looted during periods of political instability, which is, of course, reminiscent of similar developments in twentieth-century France and Austria.16 The Navy History Service published the Ναυτική Ελλάς (Naval Greece) magazine until 2002 and Ναυτική Πνευματική Καλλιέργεια (Naval Spiritual Cultivation) until 2007 and is still publishing the Ναυτική Επιθεώρηση (Naval Review) periodical. These publications, along with the Περίπλους Ναυτικής Ιστορίας (Aboard Naval History) magazine, which is published by the National Maritime Museum of Piraeus, and the Ναυσίβιος Χώρα (A Country that Lives from the Sea) journal, which is published by the Hellenic Naval Academy, constitute the main Greek fora that host papers, of varying quality, on modern Greek naval history. The Navy History Service also ran a considerable number of reprints of important works on modern Greek naval history,17 and published the following works. Ioannidou provides a concise quide to Classical Greek naval warfare and the ships with which it was fought,18 and Gerontas has compiled a chronicle of the pre-war Greek Navy that is based on secondary literature only.19 Dimitriadis and Demestichas narrate the establishment of the Cypriot 13 14 15 16

17 18 19

Hellenic National Defence General Staff, Armed Forces Entities on Military History, 33. History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2011 Annual Report (Athens, 20 December 2011). Jeremy Black, Rethinking Military History (London and New York: Routledge, 2004), 49. Demetrios Phocas, Ο Στόλος του Αιγαίου 1912–1913, Έργα και Ημέραι [The Naval Operations of the Aegean Fleet, 1912–1913] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy henceforth HSHN, 1940). Phocas, Έκθεσις επί της Δράσεως του Β. Ναυτικού κατά τον Πόλεμον 1940–1944 [Report on the Naval Operations of the Royal Hellenic Navy between 1940 and 1944], vol. 1 (Athens: HSHN, 1953), 381. Paul Halpern, ‘Comparative Naval History’ in John. B. Hattendorf (ed.), Doing Naval History, Essays Toward Improvement (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College, 1995), 77. See, among others, Marios Simpsas, Το Ναυτικό στην Ιστορία των Ελλήνων [The Navy in Greek History], 4 vols, 2nd ed. (Athens: HSHN, 2007). Zisis Fotakis, Greek Naval Strategy and Policy, 1910–1919 (London and New York: Routledge, 2005). Christy Emilio Ioannidou, Τριήρης: τακτική και επιχειρησιακό περιβάλλον στην αρχαία Ελλάδα [Trireme: Operational and Tactical Environment in Ancient Greece] (Athens: HSHN, 2016). Panagiotis Gerontas, Μεθ’ ορμής ακαθέκτου: Επίτομη ιστορία του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού 1821–1945 [At Full Speed: Epitome of the History of the Navy 1821–1945] (Athens: HSHN, 2016).

298

Fotakis

Navy,20 Charatsis addresses the sensitive issue of Greek naval accidents over the last two centuries.21and Dimitrakopoulos has fairly recently edited the insightful reminiscences of Admiral Platsoukas that cover the period between 1892 and 1920.22 The Navy History Service also published a brief study on the Soviet Navy23 and a psychological portrait of Admiral Pavlos Koundouriotis, the victorious commander in chief of the Greek Navy during the Balkan Wars and twice President of the Hellenic Republic.24 The Navy History Service itself, or its superintendent authority, the Hellenic Navy General Staff, also published studies which had been written by retired naval officers.25 Notwithstanding the fact that ‘retired naval officers will tend to be unfamiliar with the techniques and approach of historical research and are bound to find it hard to view the history of their own services with detachment’,26 the findings of these studies are, on the whole, reliable and interesting. A couple of them focus on the naval yards of Poros and Salamis and their evolution since the nineteenth century. The study of Rouskas on the Poros naval yard provides a balanced overview of its evolution from the main naval yard of the Hellenic Navy to a hub of Greek naval education. It also gives ample information regarding the institutional organisation of this yard, its management, Greek and foreign, and its logistical and educational contributions to Greek naval efforts.27 The study of Tsaprazis on the Salamis yard is slightly more detailed and focuses more on the logistical and technical work of the Salamis arsenal than on its relatively limited educational work.28 20 Konstantinos Dimitriadis and Grigoris Demestichas (eds), Ίδρυση του Κυπριακού Ναυτικού (1964–1966) [The Establishment of the Cypriot Navy (1964–1966)] (Athens: HSHN, 2011). 21 Stylianos Charatsis, Απώλειες ελληνικών Πολεμικών Πλοίων λόγω ατυχημάτων στον 19ο και 20ο αιώνα [Greek Naval Accidents during the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries] (Athens: HSHN, 2017). 22 Stamatios Platsoukas, Ταξείδια και Πολεμικά Γεγονότα: Αναμνήσεις ενός παλαιού Ναυάρχου 1892–1920 [Naval Cruises and War Events: Reminiscences of a Retired Admiral 1892–1920] (Athens: HSHN, 2019). 23 Emmanouil Mourtzakis, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό της ΕΣΣΔ μέσα από τα αρχεία της Αμερικανικής Κεντρικής Υπηρεσίας Πληροφοριών και η σύγχρονη Ρωσική Ναυτική Στρατηγική [The Soviet Navy through the Archives of CIA and the Modern Russian Naval Strategy] (Athens: HSHN, 2019). 24 Aristidis Diamantis, Ναύαρχος Παύλος Κουντουριώτης (1855–1935): μια ψυχογραφική προσέγγιση [Admiral Pavlos Koundouriotis 1855–1935, A Psychological Portait] (Athens: HSHN, 2013). 25 Hellenic National Defence General Staff, Armed Forces Entities on Military History, 33, 38. 26 Nicholas Rodger, ‘Considerations on Writing a General Naval History’ in Hattendorf, Doing Naval History, 118. 27 Ioannis Rouskas, Πόρος Ναύσταθμος και Εκπαιδευτήριο του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού [Poros, Arsenal and Naval School of the Greek Navy] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff henceforth HNGS, 1989). 28 Nikolaos Tsaprazis, Ο Πολεμικός Ναύσταθμος Σαλαμίνος [The Naval Arsenal of Salamis] (Athens: HSHN, 1991).

The Development of Naval History in Greece

299

An important study, which was published by the Hellenic Navy General Staff in the late 1990s, is a bilingual work (English and Greek) on the uniforms of the Hellenic Navy.29 Based on relevant decrees and regulations, photographic material and interviews with retired naval officers, its author explains in ‘a war and society’ fashion30 the social and cultural constraints that led to the slow introduction and simplification of naval uniforms in the Hellenic Navy. It also attributes their eventual simplification and practicality to the modernising work of the Venizelos administration in the early 1910s and the contemporary contribution of the British naval missions to Greece. Another important work published by the Hellenic Navy General Staff is Admiral Dimitrakopoulos’s three-volume bibliographical dictionary of the graduates of the Hellenic Naval Academy during its first ninety years of existence (1884–1973).31 The author’s meticulous collection and methodical arrangement of relevant data produced a highly readable source of information concerning a variety of interesting topics such as the socio-economic and geographic origins of the Greek naval cadets, the evolution of the Hellenic Naval Academy, its relations with other Greek military and civil institutions of higher education, the educational and professional experience that its graduates acquired abroad, the influence of domestic politics on their careers, the professional achievements and failings of the Academy graduates and their contribution to Greek politics and culture. Dimitrakopoulos produced a sound work of reference for all those who are interested in the interrelation between the micro-history of the Greek naval officer corps and the macro-history of the Greek Navy as a whole. His work ties up, to some extent, with that of Vice Admiral Lismanis, which was published by the Navy History Service. This focuses on Hydriot families that gave Greece a good number of able naval officers before, during and after the Greek War of Independence (1821–30).32 Information about the eminent Hydriot naval families of Gikas, Voulgaris and Economou is also supplied by an independent researcher, Mr Mavrideros.33 29 30 31

32 33

Gisis Papageorgiou, Uniforms of the Hellenic Navy (Athens: HNGS 1998). See also Nikolaos Panos, Στολές του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού: κατά τον Β’ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο 1940–1944 [Greek Naval Uniforms 1940–1944] (Athens: HSHN, 2016). Black, Rethinking Military History, 50. Anastasios Dimitrakopoulos, Βιογραφικό Λεξικό των Αποφοίτων της Σχολής Ναυτικών Δοκίμων. Οι Τάξεις Εισόδου 1884–1950, I, Α–Κ., vol. II, Λ–Ω. vol. III, Οι Τάξεις Εισόδου 1951–1973, 3 vols [Biographical Lexicon of the Graduates of the Hellenic Naval Academy, 1884–1977] (Athens: HNGS, 2006–7). Dimitrios Lismanis, Δημήτριος Λίσμανης, Υδραίοι Πρόδρομοι και Ναυμάχοι του Εικοσιένα. Επιφανείς και αφανείς. Ιστορική και Γενεαλογική Έρευνα 14ος–20ος αιώνας [Hydriotes, Forerunners and Naval Fighters in the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: HSHN, 2007). Dimitrios Mavrideros, Γενεαλογικά σημειώματα: το γένος Οικονόμου της Ύδρας (1668–1949) [Geneological Notes: The Economou Family of Hydra (1668–1949)] (Athens: n.p., 2012).

300

Fotakis

The Navy History Service is also credited with the publication of a catalogue of its archival holdings, another one on Greek warships, and a book on those who fell in battle during the Second World War34 It has also published a collective work on the centennial of the distinguished service of the Greek armoured cruiser Georgios Averoff (1911–2011)35 and three narratives of Greek naval operations during the first half of the twentieth century.36 It has also touched cultural issues37 in a modest attempt to apply the history of culture to the study of naval affairs. The field of Naval History has been further cultivated by the naval historians of the Hellenic Naval Academy, who had also offered relevant courses at the Hellenic Naval War College and the Hellenic School for Petty Naval Officers. The Academy itself has recently been the subject of a chronicle,38 and the successive holders of its chair in Naval History, Drs Varfis and Loukas, treated organisational aspects of the Greek Navy, the naval operations that took place in the Greek seas during the Ottoman rule and the intellectual background of Greek sea power up to the First World War.39 Under

34

35 36

37 38 39

Mavrideros, Γενεαλογική μνήμη: Το γένος Γκίκα της Ύδρας (1628–1935) [Geneological Memory: The Gikas Family of Hydra 1628–1935] (Athens: n.p., 2014). Mavrideros, Γενεαλογικές ανιχνεύσεις: Το γένος Βούλγαρη της Ύδρας (1658–1996) [Geneological Research: The Voulgaris Family of Hydra 1658–1996] (Athens: n.p., 2018). Ekaterini Fakalou, Κατάλογος αρχειακού υλικού Πολεμικού Ναυτικού, 1940–1945 [Catalogue of the Archival Material of the Greek Navy, 1940–1945], 3 vols (Athens: HSHN, 2008). Fakalou, Τα πολεμικά πλοία της Ελλάδας [Greek Warships], 4 vols (Athens: HSHN , 2008). Konstantinos Paizis-Paradelis, Ηρώων Πεσόντων Πολεμικού Ναυτικού στους Πολέμους 1940–1945 [Naval Heroes That Fell in Battle During the Wars of 1940–1945] (Athens: HSHN, 1990). Elias Daloumis (ed.), Γ. Αβέρωφ, 100 χρόνια [Centennial of HNS G. Averoff ] (Athens: HSHN, 2011). Anastasios Dimitrakopoulos (ed.), 1912–1913, Εκατό Χρόνια από τη Ναυτική Εποποιΐα των Βαλκανικών Πολέμων [1912–1913, A Century Since the Naval Epic of the Balkan Wars] (Athens: HSHN, 2012). Dimitrios Tagalakis, Αναμνήσεις του Ναυτικού Αγώνος: Βαλκανικοί Πόλεμοι, Αιγαίον – Ιόνιον [Memoirs of the Naval Struggle: Balkan Wars, Aegean – Ionian Sea] (Athens: HSHN 1995). Evangelos Lagaras, Ναυτικές Επιχειρήσεις κατά τη Μάχη της Κρήτης [Naval Operations during the Battle of Crete] (Athens: HSHN, 1991). Dimitrios Giakoumakis, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό στην Ελληνική Τέχνη [The Greek Navy in Greek Art] (Athens:HSHN, 1996). Giakoumakis, Θαλασσινά Χαρακτικά [Sea Engravings] (Athens: HSHN 1996). Markos Mastrakas, Ιστορία της ΣΝΔ & Συναφών Γεγονότων 1971–2010 [History of the Hellenic Naval Academy, 1971–2010] (Athens: Private edition, 2011). Konstantinos Varfis, Τό ελληνικό ναυτικό κατά την Καποδιστριακή περίοδο: Τά χρόνια της προσαρμογής [The Greek Navy During the Capodistria Administration: The Adjustment Era] (Athens: Syllogos pros Diadosin Ofelimon Vivlion, 1994). Varfis, Βενετοτουρκικοί και Ρωσοτουρκικοί πόλεμοι στις ελληνικές θάλασσες: 1453–1821 [Venetian-Turkish and Russian-Turkish Wars in the Greek Seas, 1453–1821] (Athens: Iris, 1995). Ioannis Loukas, Θαλάσσια ισχύς και ελληνικό κράτος: Ο στόλος της μεγάλης ιδέας [Sea Power and the Greek State: The War Fleet of Ιrredentism] (Athens: Epikoinonies, 1998).

The Development of Naval History in Greece

301

Dr Loukas a small Naval Museum was established at the Hellenic Naval Acad­ emy and five international Naval History symposia were organised, whose proceedings were subsequently published.40 The current Assistant Professor in Naval History at the Hellenic Naval Academy, Dr Zisis Fotakis, is an Oxford-educated naval historian whose work focuses on the naval history of modern Greece.41 His monograph ‘Greek Naval Strategy and Policy, 1910– 1919’ has been judged as ‘an admirably clear account which will be of value to all scholars working on the diplomatic and strategic factors which gave rise to the First World War and governed its course’.42 He has also edited the proceedings of an international conference on the First World War in the Mediterranean and the role of the island of Lemnos.43 He is close to the ‘new military history school’, and treats organisational, educational, strategic planning and force structure aspects of the history of the Greek Navy, the naval importance of the Greek territory and the interconnections of the aforementioned topics with policy-making and alliance politics. Given that the line between academic and popular history is less distinct in Greece than in the USA or Europe, Dr Fotakis, like many Japanese academic historians,44 does not publish exclusively through scholarly journals and presses. Instead, he also contributes to magazines and special series commissioned by newspapers and public foundations.45 Moreover, he has recently been appointed as director of the newly established Naval History Research Laboratory at the Hellenic Naval Academy. In addition to the study of the naval history of modern Greece by the aforementioned bodies, a good number of works on naval medicine have been

40

41 42 43 44 45

Ioannis Loukas (ed.), Πρακτικά Α’ Πελαγικής Συνάντησης Ο ελληνισμός, η Δύση και η κατανομή της Θαλάσσιας Ισχύος στον Ευρασιατικό χώρο [Hellenism, the West and the Balance of Sea Power in Eurasia], 2 vols (Athens, HNGS, 1998). Loukas (ed.), Πρακτικά Β Πελαγικής Συνάντησης, Η Ανατολική Μεσόγειος από τον Ψυχρό Πόλεμο στο Νέο Διεθνές Σύστημα [The Eastern Mediterranean during the Cold War and the 1990s] (Athens, HNGS, 1999). Loukas (ed.), NATO’s Maritime Power 1949–1990, Proceedings of the Fourth Pelagic Meeting (Athens, HNGS, 2002). Loukas (ed.), Πρακτικά Πέμπτης Πελαγικής Συνάντησης “Ασφάλεια και Πειρατεία στην Ανοιχτή Θάλασσα. Η Σύγχρονη Νομική Προσέγγιση μέσα από τη Σύμβαση του Montego Bay [Maritime Security and Piracy in Open Seas According to the Montego Bay Convention] (Athens, HNGS, 2003). Fotakis, Greek Naval Strategy and Policy. Nicholas Rodger, ‘Review of Fotakis, Greek Naval Strategy and Policy’, Journal of Maritime Research (August 2006). Zisis Fotakis, The First World War in the Mediterranean and the Role of Lemnos (Athens: Herodotos, 2018). Black, Rethinking Military History, 41. A good number of Fotakis’s online articles can be found at https://eclass.snd.edu.gr/ modules/link/index.php?course=TOM7112&urlview=001100000000.

302

Fotakis

published by competent naval officers.46 This is not insignificant, considering that ‘far from weaponry being the key sphere for the successful application of technology in order to enhance military capability, it was these other fields in which applications were most important … for example advances in food preservation, medical treatment and communications’.47 A number of historical photographic albums48 and studies have also been published independently by Greek naval officers and scholars. The most important of these studies is Admiral Metallinos’s two-volume work on the naval dimension of the Greek War of Independence (1821–30), which employs a ‘holistic’ approach to its subject. It discusses the strategic context of the Greek War of Independence and examines the organisational and logistical background of the Greek naval effort. It also presents succinctly the naval operations in the Greek seas between 1821 and 1830, and explains lessons learnt that influenced the force structure and the organisation of the Greek Navy.49 Captain Tripontikas and Stephanos Milesis have written an eloquent account of the first transatlantic training cruise of a Greek warship in 1900.50 Captain Tripontikas also wrote a piece on 46

47 48

49 50

Aristidis Diamantis and Ioannis Dodos, 3000 χρόνια Ελληνική Ναυτική Ιατρική [3,000 Years of Greek Naval Medicine] (Athens: HNGS, 2000). Ημερίδα Ιστορίας Ναυτικής Ιατρικής, Η Ιστορία των Λοιμοκαθαρτηρίων και Υγειονομείων στον Ελλαδικό χώρο [Workshop on the History of the Quarantine Houses and Health Inspectorates in the Greek Lands] (Athens, HNGS, 2007). Ναυτικό Νοσοκομείο Σαλαμίνας, Λεύκωμα Ναυτικό Νοσοκομείο Σαλαμίνας [Photographic Album of the Naval Ηospital of Salamis] (Athens: Naval Hospital of Salamis, 2003). Ioannis Polychronidis, Ναυτικό Νοσοκομείο Κρήτης 1969–1999: Ιστορικό-φωτογραφικό λεύκωμα για το Ναυτικό Νοσοκομείο Κρήτης και τα στρατιωτικά νοσοκομεία της Κρήτης: (Από την περίοδο του Βυζαντίου μέχρι σήμερα) [Photographic Album of the Naval Hospital of Crete and all Military Hospitals in Crete since the Byzantine Era] (Chania, Naval Hospital of Crete, 1999). Επιστημονική Ένωση Υγιειονομικών Ενόπλων Δυνάμεων, Ιστορία της στρατιωτικής ιατρικής στην Ελλάδα [History of Military Medicine in Greece] (Athens: Scientific Union of Hellenic Military Medical Personnel, 2000). Black, Rethinking Military History, 111. Γ.Ε.Ν., ΕΚΠ Άρης  – Λεύκωμα Παροπλισμού [Decommissioning HNS Arιs: Photographic Album] (Athens: HNGS, 2002). Eleftherios Sfaktos, Ιστορικό φωτογραφικό λεύκωμα Σχολής Ναυτόπαιδων-ΣΔΥΝ-ΣΜΥΝ, 1946–2000 [Photographic Album of the Hellenic Naval College for Petty Officers, 1946–2000] (Athens, HNGS, 2007). Anastasios Dimitrakopoulos, Λεύκωμα φωτογραφιών των αποφοίτων της Σχολής Ναυτικών Δοκίμων: Οι τάξεις εισόδου 1884–1973 [Photographic Album of the Graduates of the Hellenic Naval Academy 1884–1977] (Athens: HNGS, 2009). Nikolaos Makkas, O Ελληνικός Στόλος στις αρχές του 20ου αιώνα, Φωτογραφικές μαρτυρίες [Photographical Testimonies of the Hellenic Warfleet at the Beginning of the 20th Century] (Athens, Hellenic, Historical and Ethnological Society, 1990). Zisis Fotakis, The Greek Navy in the Balkan Wars, 1912–1913 (Athens: Militos, 2011). Constantine Metallinos, Ο Ναυτικός Πόλεμος κατά την Ελληνική Επανάσταση 1821–1829 [The Naval War During the Greek War of Independence, 1821–1829], 2 vols (Athens: Andy’s Publishers, 2016). Panagiotis Tripontikas and Stefanos Milesis, 1900: Οι περιπέτειες του Παύλου Κουντουριώτη στον πρώτο υπερατλαντικό πλου με το Εύδρομο ‘Ναύαρχος Μιαούλης’ [1900: The Adventures of

The Development of Naval History in Greece

303

the shipwrecks in the Greek seas.51 The corresponding works of Thoktaridis and Bilalis advanced this subfield of naval history further.52 Particular mention should also be made of the work of Rear Admiral Theodosiou and Captain Aspropotamitis. Their findings about Greek innovation in naval de-mining during the early 1910s support Winston Churchill’s expectation that the participation of the Greek light fleet in the Dardanelles campaign could have made the difference.53 The naval history in Greece has also been strengthened by a ‘Big Bang’ in the establishment of maritime museums; over the last quarter century, their number doubled with the establishment of the naval museums of Chios (1991), Symi (1991), Kalymnos (1994), Perama (1994) Ithaca (1997), Hellenic Naval Academy Museum (2003), Litochoro (2004), Lambros Katsonis (2004), Ionio (2009) Kavala (2012)54 and the development of the destroyer Velos, the cable ship Thalis o Milisios, the sailing ships Evgenios Evgenidis and Evangelistria and the trireme Olympias into naval museums.55 The rapid increase in the number of Greek maritime museums reflects similar international developments. Greek maritime museums hold bi-annual maritime history conferences, and certain of the corresponding proceedings have been published.56 Few of these

51 52

53 54 55 56

Pavlos Kountouriotis during the First Transatlantic Cruise with the Light Cruiser Navarchos Miaoulis] (Athens: HNGS, 2015). Panagiotis Tripontikas, Ναυάγια στις Ελληνικές θάλασσες: 1830–1951. Η υποβρύχια περιουσία των Μ.Τ.Ν. & Ν.Α.Τ. [Shipwrecks in Greek Seas: 1830–1951. The Submarine Property of the Pension Funds for Naval and Merchant Marine Personnel] (Athens: n.p., 2016). Konstantinos Thoktaridis and Aris Bilalis, Ναυάγια στον ελληνικό βυθό: Κατάδυση στην ιστορία τους [Shipwrecks in the Bottom of the Greek Seas: A Dive into Their History] (Athens: Aik. Laskaridi Foundation, 2015). Thoktaridis and Bilalis, Ανελκύοντας την ιστορία: Η εποποιία της ανέλκυσης ναυαγίων στην μεταπολεμική Ελλάδα [The Epic of the Lifting of Shipwrecks from the Bottom of the Seain Post-war Greece] (Thessaloniki: Kyriakidis, 2017). Mine Warfare Administration, 130 χρόνια Δράσης πλοίων Ναρκοπολέμου, 1880–2010 [130 Years of Greek Naval Units of Mine Warfare] (Salamis, Hellenic Navy, Fleet Headquarters, 2010). See also Fotakis, Greek Naval Strategy, 117. Charalambos Tortorelis, ‘Φορείς Ναυτικής Παράδοσης και Θαλασσίου Περιβάλλοντος’ [Foundations of Naval Tradition and Marine Environment], Περίπλους Ναυτικής Ιστορίας 62 (2008), 27–51. https://averof.mil.gr/parko-naftikis-paradosis/. Sappho Mortaki et al. (eds), Η ναυτιλία στο μακεδονικό χώρο από την αρχαιότητα μέχρι σήμερα: Πρακτικά Ζ’ Πανελλήνιου Συνεδρίου Ναυτικών Μουσείων. Λιτόχωρο, 19–21 Σεπτεμβρίου 2008: Η συμβολή της λιτοχωρίτικης ναυτιλίας στη διατήρηση της ελληνικότητας της Θεσσαλονίκης-Μακεδονίας στη μετά Οθωμανοκρατίας εποχή [Shipping in Macedonia from Antiquity to the Present: Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the Greek Maritime Museums. Litochoro 19–21 September 2008: The Contribution of the Shipping of Litochoro in the Preservation of Hellenism in Thessaloniki and Macedonia in the Aftermath of the Ottoman Period] (Litochoro: Maritime Museum of Litochoro, 2014). Panos Valkavanis et al. (eds), Πρακτικά 10ου Πανελλήνιου Συνεδρίου Ναυτικών Μουσείων: Ελληνικές Νaυτικές Πολιτείες, 16ος–19ος αιώνας

304

Fotakis

museums are under the jurisdiction of the Greek Ministry of Defence. This possibly reflects the contemporary strength of Greek shipping and Greek maritime economic history,57 and the fact that these are just about the only places in the country where maritime and naval history co-exist.58 Indeed, most of the exhibits of the aforementioned naval museums belong to merchant ships, but these are not without naval significance, given that merchant ships could be used militarily well into the twentieth century.59 The ‘Big Bang’ in maritime museums is supplemented by the considerable number of similar collections that are kept by museums of general history throughout Greece,60 and the increase in corresponding archival sources, following the extension of the provincial network of the Hellenic National Archives61 and the substantial development of the Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive. The latter holds scores of private papers of officers and politicians who made an important contribution to Greek naval defence.62 The considerable development in the conservation and cataloguing methods of relevant archival resources and their gradual digitalisation since 1989 is also noteworthy. Equally noteworthy is the Hellenic Maritime Museum of Piraeus for its events of naval historical interest,63 and its publication programme, which is frequently bilingual (Greek and English) and includes some of the finest works in naval history ever produced in this country.

57

58

59

60 61

62 63

[Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the Greek Maritime Museums: Greek Maritime Cities 16th–19th Centuries] (Athens: Maritime and Historical Museum of Galaxidi, 2018). Gelina Harlaftis, Ιστορία της Ελληνόκτητης Ναυτιλίας 19ος 20ος αιώνας [History of the Greekowned Greek Merchant Marine During the 19th and the 20th Centuries] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001). Gelina Harlaftis, ‘Η ναυτιλιακή ιστορία εν πλω και υπ’ ατμόν’ [Maritime History at Sea and at Full Steam] in Paschalis M. Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 2, 425–45. Nicholas Rodger, ‘Britain’ in John Hattendorf (ed.), Ubi Sumus? The State of Naval and Maritime History (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College Press, 1994), 45, 48. In North America the division between maritime and naval studies is noticeable, too. See John Hattendorf, ‘Introduction’ in Ubi Sumus, 5. The cases of the American Civil War (1861–5) and the Cretan Revolution (1866–9) bear this out. See, respectively, Elmer Potter and Chester Nimitz, Sea Power: A Naval History (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1960), 244–61. Konstantinos Rados, Τα καταδρομικά της ‘Κεντρικής υπέρ των Κρητών Επιτροπής’ εν τω Αγώνι του 1866–1868 [The Naval Operations of the Cruisers of the Central Committee for Crete between 1866 and 1868] (Athens: n.p., 1896). See, among others, Tortorelis, ‘Φορείς Ναυτικής Παράδοσης’, 59. Stathis Kalyvas, ‘Εμφύλιος Πόλεμος (1943–1949): το τέλος των Μύθων και η Στροφή προς το Μαζικό Επίπεδο’ [The Greek Civil War, 1943–1949: The End of Myths and the Turn to the Level of the History of the Masses] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας, vol. 1, 622. http://www.elia.org.gr/archives-collections/archives/?pageno=3#catalogue. It would be interesting to see what has been the impact of related events that were hosted by the aforementioned institutions. That is, however, beyond the scope of this paper.

The Development of Naval History in Greece

305

The most interesting of these works is the monograph on the Greek destroyer Queen Olga which distinguished itself during World War II. This was written by Vice Admiral Constantine Metallinos, whose personal service in a destroyer of the same class, indefatigable research in Greek and foreign archives and among war veterans, and keen eye for detail and superb prose gave us a book which constitutes a detailed analysis of Queen Olga’s naval operations and a clear, succinct overview of the technological and strategic realities that characterised the naval war in the Mediterranean between 1940 and 1943.64 ‘Hellenic Warships, 1829–2001’ is a reference work on the technical characteristics and naval service of all Greek warships since the establishment of the modern Greek state.65 This has been supplemented by the study of Daloumis.66 Both books tie up with the well written two-volume work on the submarines of the Hellenic Navy, which was authored by Vice Admirals Masouras and Katopodis. The first volume is more informative than the second one. Both volumes cover, in varying detail, the beginnings, organisation, education, training, infrastructure and logistics of the Hellenic Submarine Service. They further present the technical characteristics and naval operations of the individual units of the Greek submarine fleet.67 Greek submarine operations during World War II were also treated by the 1995 study of Paizis-Paradelis and Damvergis.68 Equally informative, on the operational side, are the works of Vice Admiral Ioannis Paloubis on the Naval Air Service between 1913 and 1941 and the Naval Struggle of the Balkan Wars.69 Captain Charatsis’s mediocre work on 64

65 66 67 68 69

Constantine Metallinos, ‘Βασίλισσα Όλγα’ Ένα αντιτορπιλικό στη δίνη του πολέμου [Queen Olga: A Destroyer in the Heat of War] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum henceforth HMM, 1996). A photographic album and a book on the same subject were also published after the publication of Metallinos’s work. Vassilis Mentogiannis, Kostis Mitsotakis and George Nikolaidis, 52 μέρες 1943: Το αντιτορπιλικό Βασίλισσα Όλγα και η μάχη της Λέρου [52 Days of 1943: The Destroyer Queen Olga and the Battle of Leros] (Athens: Kastaniotis, 2004). Gerasimos Apostolatos, Ο Πλωτάρχης Γεώργιος Μπλέσσας και το Αντιτορπιλικό Βασίλισσα Όλγα [Lieutenant Commander Blessas and the Destroyer Queen Olga] (Piraeus: HMM, 1997). Constantine Paizis-Paradellis, Hellenic Warships, 1829–2001 (Athens, HMM, 2002). Elias Daloumis, Τα Πλοία του Ναυτικού: 1826–2017 [Naval Ships: 1829–2001] (Piraeus: HMM, 2017). Timotheos Massouras and Thomas Katopodis, Hellenic Submarines, 2 vols (Athens: HMM, 2010). Konstantinos Paizis-Paradelis and Nikolaos Damvergis, Ο Σιωπηλός Πόλεμος. Η δράση των Ελληνικών Υποβρυχίων 1940–1944 [The Silent War: The Naval Operations of the Greek Submarines, 1940–1944] (Piraeus: HMM, 1995). Ioannis Paloumbis, From the Seas … to the Skies. The Naval Air Force Chronicle, 1913–1941 (Piraeus:HMM, 2009). Ioannis Paloumbis, Βαλκανικοί Πόλεμοι  … ο Ναυτικός Αγώνας 1912– 1913 (Piraeus, HMM, 2007) [The Balkan Wars … the War at Sea 1912–1913]. See also Ioannis Paloumbis, The Naval War of 1912–1913: 100 Years Since the Strategic Naval Victory of the Balkan Wars (Athens, HMM, 2013).

306

Fotakis

Greek naval operations (1919–20) in the Black Sea during the Russian Civil War was probably published by the Hellenic Maritime Museum of Piraeus, because it is the only work of its kind in Greece.70 Being a participant in the naval coup against the Greek junta that was to have taken place at the end of May 1973, Vice Admiral Paloubis provides a first-hand account of it.71 Politics in the navy in the early 1950s is treated by an independent researcher, Mr Giannarakos.72 Paloubis has also tried his hand in the maritime dimension of Greek history with good effect.73 The Hellenic Maritime Museum of Piraeus also included in its publication programme three works of Vice Admiral Dimitrakopoulos. The first one contains French Admiralty documents which discuss First Balkan War developments,74 while the second treats Greek naval development during the Age of Imperialism, supplementing effectively the relevant work of Vice Admiral Phocas for the period between 1833 and 1873 and those of Fotakis for the period between the Eastern Crisis of 1875–8 and the end of the First World War.75 His magnus opus, however, is a five-volume collection of 160 interviews with World War II veterans.76 In the absence of a Greek equivalent of the British Navy Records Society which encourages ‘the collection and study of the papers of men and women below the top tier of the Navy’,77 this work constitutes the nearest thing ‘to the history from below’ approach one can find in Greek naval history. It also confirms Paul Kennedy’s view that ‘naval 70 71 72

73

74 75 76 77

Stylianos Charatsis, Η Πρώτη Επέμβαση. Η άγνωστη δράση του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού στην Μεσημβρινή Ρωσία 1918–20 [The First Intervention: The Little Known Naval Operations of the Hellenic Navy in Southern Russia, 1918–1920] (Piraeus:HMM, 1997). Ioannis Paloumbis, Οι άνθρωποι του Κινήματος του Ναυτικού. Μάιος 1973 [Τhe Participants in the Naval Coup of May 1973] (Piraeus:HMM, 2016). Leonidas Giannarakos, Μια ιστορία όπως δεν γράφτηκε … 60 χρόνια μετά: Το ιστορικό των ναυτοπαίδων, που το 1952 συντάραξε το πανελλήνιο με την ομαδική απείθεια [A Story in a Way That Has Never Been Recorded Before … Sixty Years Later. The Case of the School for the Naval NCOs That Made a Sensation in Greece with Its Insubordination] (Athens: Lexitypon, 2012). Ioannis Paloubis, Ελληνική ναυτική παράδοση [Ten Thousand Years of Hellenic Maritime Tradition] (Piraeus:HMM, 2014). Ioannis Paloubis, Ελλήνων Πλόες: Η Πορεία της Ελληνικής Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας δια μέσου των Αιώνων [Seafaring of the Hellenes: The Course of the Hellenic Merchant Marine through the Centuries] (Piraeus: HMM, 2017). Anastasios Dimitrakopoulos (ed.), Ο Α΄ Βαλκανικός Πόλεμος μέσα από τα αρχεία της Ιστορικής Υπηρεσίας του γαλλικού ναυτικού [The First Balkan War through the Archives of the Historical Service of the French Navy] (Piraeus:HMM, 1996). Anastasios Dimitrakopoulos, Ιστορία του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού 1874–1912 [History of the Greek Navy, 1874–1912], 2 vols (Piraeus:HMM, 2015). Anastasios Dimitrakopoulos, Β’ Παγκόσμιος Πόλεμος, Οι πολεμιστές του Ναυτικού Θυμούνται … [The Second World War: The Fighters of the Hellenic Navy Remember], 5 vols (Piraeus:HMM, 2011). Kenneth Hagan and Mark Shulman, ‘Mahan Plus One Hundred: The Current State of American Naval History’ in Hattendorf, Ubi Sumus, 396.

The Development of Naval History in Greece

307

historians, are not very good at a history from below approach to modern naval history …’78 This approach is also served, to a lesser extent, by the work of Commodore Lachanos who meticulously collected data on all Greek naval personnel who had received war medals during World War II and the circumstances in which they had qualified for them.79 Finally, a 2011 publication of the National Maritime Museum succinctly treats the relation between war at sea and painting by focusing on the visual display – artistic and popular – of the naval operations of the Balkan Wars, the Greek armoured cruiser Georgios Averoff and Greek naval personnel. It is a helpful work which bridges the world of culture with the kingdom of war and reveals contemporary perceptions and ideas regarding the Naval Struggle of 1912–13.80 To sum it up, the aforementioned public bodies and naval persons focus on the naval history of Greece during the twentieth century. The questions they apparently ask about Greek naval actions, institutions and so forth appear to be largely shaped by the challenges that Greece faces in the context of Mediterranean power politics. While not discounting other factors of success, gallantry and superior seamanship continue to be seen as the best means of offsetting the frequent numerical disadvantage of the Greek Navy vis-à-vis the enemy. 4

Greek Academia and Naval History, 1989–2020

The increasing conservatism of the political climate in universities, which followed that of the country as a whole in the 1990s and concurrent international developments, gained some degree of respectability for modern naval history within Greek academia. This was reinforced by the contemporary global turn to political history.81 However, the academic footprint of naval history in Greece remains small. 78 79 80 81

Paul Kennedy, ‘Levels of Approach and Contexts in Naval History: Admiral Tirpitz and the Origins of Fascism’ in Hattendorf, Doing Naval History, 144. Nikolaos Lachanos, Δόξα και Δάφνες. Τιμητικές Διακρίσεις που απενεμήθησαν εις το προσωπικό του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού κατά τον Πόλεμο 1940–1945 [Glory and Laurels: Honours Awarded to the Naval Personnel During the War, 1940–1945] (Athens:HMM, 1991). Hellenic Maritime Museum, Το Θωρηκτό ‘Γεώργιος Αβέρωφ’, 1911–2011. Ιστορία και Τέχνη [The Armoured Cruiser G. Averoff, 1911–2011. History and Art] (Piraeus:HMM, 2011). Vassilis Kremmidas, ‘Απολογιζόμαστε και Χαιρετούμε’ [Review and Farewell] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 2, 737. Iliou, ‘Ιστοριογραφικές Ανανεώσεις”, 401. Rodger, ‘Britain’ in Hattendorf, Ubi Sumus, 46. Katerina Bregianni, Γενική Ιστορία της Ευρώπης. Ιστορία και Ιστοριογραφία: Νεότερες Προσεγγίσεις [A General History of Europe. History and Historiography: New Approaches] (Patras: Hellenic Open University, 2008), 44–45.

308

Fotakis

With an unimportant exception,82 the corresponding book production of professional Greek historians is characterised by ethnocentricity, which is a feature of historical writing in many countries. Despite this, many aspects of modern Greek naval history remain as obscure as those of most Eastern European countries.83 The naval history of modern Greece has been unevenly covered by professional Greek historians over the last quarter of a century. As in Britain, the present century, especially the 1940s, has attracted the attention of the Greek public, justifying publications of varying scholarship.84 The naval relations between Greece and Russia have received some attention recently,85 while the naval aspect of the Greek War of Independence has largely been ignored,86 in contrast to the large number of corresponding works before the 1970s.87 A notable exception to this is the collective work ‘Ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων 1700– 1821’, which comprehensively treats the mechanisms, dimensions, strengths, characteristics and peculiarities of the sustained maritime growth of Greek 82

83 84 85

86

87

Ilias Iliopoulos, Γεωπολιτική των θαλάσσιων δυνάμεων: Η γεωγραφία της Βρεττανικής Ισχύος 1815–1956, με συνεκτίμηση του Ανατολικού Ζητήματος και των Ανταγωνισμών Ισχύος στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο [Geopolitics of the Naval Powers: The Geography of the British Power 1815–1956 in Consideration of the Eastern Question and the Power Struggles in the Eastern Mediterranean] (Athens: Limon, 2017). Black, Rethinking Military History, 67, 81. Kremmidas, ‘Απολογιζόμαστε και Χαιρετούμε’ in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας, vol. 2, 738. Rodger, ‘Britain’ in Hattendorf, Ubi Sumus, 53. Vassilis Kremmidas, ‘Απολογιζόμαστε και Χαιρετούμε’ [Review and Farewell] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας, vol. 2, 737. Panagiotis Stamou, Ο Αξιωματικός Λάμπρος Κατσώνης και ο Ρωσσικός Στολίσκος στη Μεσόγειο [Greek Naval Officer Lampros Katsonis and the Russian Flotilla in the Aegean] (Athens: Papasotiriou, 2011). Panos Stamou, Λάμπρος Κατσώνη: τεκμήρια ιστορίας  – λαογραφίας  – παράδοσης [Lampros Katsonis: Evidence of History, Folklore and Tradition] (Livadia: Chouzoumis Bros, 2012). Fotis Mouratidis, Έλληνες Ναύαρχοι & Στρατηγοί του Ρωσικού Πολεμικού Ναυτικού [Greek Admirals and Generals of the Russian Navy] (Athens: Asine, 2017). Annita Prassa and Konstantina Adamopoulou-Pavlou, Ανδρέας Μιαούλης. Από την υπόδουλη ως την ελεύθερη Ελλάδα, 1769–1835 [Andreas Miaoulis: From the Enslaved to Independent Greece, 1769–1835] (Athens: Estia, 2003). Fula Pispiriga, Το ημερολόγιον του ‘Κίμωνος’ [The Logship of Kimon] (Athens: Potamos, 2012). Eutychia D. Liata, Εκ του υστερήματος αρμάτωσαν …: η φρεγάτα ‘Τιμολέων’ στην επανάσταση του 1821 [Frigate Timoleon in the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: Hellenic National Research Foundation, 2020). Christos Loukos, Η Επανάσταση του 1821. Από κυρίαρχο αντικείμενο έρευνας και διδασκαλίας στην Υποβάθμιση και Σιωπή [The Greek War of Independence: From Dominant Subject of Teaching and Research to Retreat and Silence] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας, vol. 1, 579–80.

The Development of Naval History in Greece

309

shipping in the era of Anglo-French antagonism. This is done with an eye to the naval implications of this growth for the Greek War of Independence.88 The Greek naval organisation before the First World War and the contribution of the Greek Navy to World War II has been studied to some extent, while the Greek naval defence industry and its connection to the civilian industrial sector has hardly been examined.89 Scant attention has also been paid to machinery and other systems important in logistics, communications and other aspects of war,90 though some work has been done on ships and shipbuilding.91 Moreover, a small number of new military historians have written on the social composition of armies and navies, civil – military relations, the internal dynamics of the officer corps of the Greek Navy, the life of Greek

88

89

90

91

Gelina Harlaftis and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων 1700–1821: Ο αιώνας της ακμής πριν από την Επανάσταση [Greek Merchant Shipping 1700–1821: A Century of Growth Before the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: Kedros, 2013); Katerina Galani and Gelina Harlaftis, Greek Shipping During the Greek War of Independence: The Merchant and Naval Fleet (1821–1831) (Heraklion: Crete University Press, 2021). Panagiotis Fourakis, ‘La Constitution de la Marine de Guerre Hellénique et la Force Naval de la Grèce (1900–1913)’ (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sorbonne, 2008). Ioannis Malakasis, Το Ναυτικό στο Δεύτερο Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [The Greek Navy in the Second World War], 2 vols (Ioannina: n.p., 1995). Ioannis Malakasis, Η Δράση της Ελληνικής Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας στη Μέση Ανατολή [Greek Maritime Operations in the Middle East During the Second World War] (Ioannina: n.p., 1995). Adam Stephanadis, Το Ελληνικό Κράτος της Θάλασσας. Η Ιστορία του Σύγχρονου Ελληνικού Πολεμικού Ναυτικού [Greek Seapower: The History of the Modern Greek Navy], 2 vols (Athens: Stephanadis, 2017). Dimitrios Galon, Διαβαίνοντας τις ατραπούς του θρύλου: Η δράση και η βύθιση του υποβρυχίου Β. Π. Κατσώνης (Υ1) ιδωμένη μέσα από τα ιστορικά αρχεία και τα ημερολόγια πολέμου όλων των επιχειρησιακά εμπλεκόμενων πλευρών [Crossing the Paths of a Legend: The Naval Operations and Sinking of the HNS Katsonis as Reported in the Archives and Logbooks of All Interested Parties] (Athens: ELINIS, 2020). Jon Tetsuro Sumida and David Alan Rosenberg, ‘Machines, Men, Manufacturing, Management, and Money: The Study of Navies as Complex Organizations and the Transformation of Twentieth-century Naval History’ in Hattendorf, Doing Naval History, 25–26. Introduction by Richard Overy in Sebastian Cox and Peter Gray, Air Power History: Turning Points from Kittyhawk to Kosovo (London: Routledge, 2002), x. Eleni Gardika-Katsiadaki and George Charonitis, Το Θωρηκτό ‘Γεώργιος Αβέρωφ’ κατά τους Βαλκανικούς Πολέμους 1912–1913 [The Armoured Cruiser Georgios Averoff in the Balkan Wars, 1912–1913] (Athens: National Research Foundation Eleutherios Venizelos, Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive & Benaki Museum, 2002). Elias Roumanis, O τορπιλισμός της Έλλης και το έπος του 1940–1941: Συγκριτική ιστορική μελέτη [The Torpedoing of HNS Helle and the Epic of 1940–1941] (Athens: TINOS, 2002). Christos Boulotis, Ναυς: Πλοία και ναυπηγική στον Ελληνικό κόσμο [Ships and Shipbuilding in the Greek World] (Athens: Polaris, 2014).

310

Fotakis

sailors, the intervention of the armed forces into Greek politics and social science concepts like professionalisation.92 The naval history production of professional Greek historians is also lacking in ‘new military history’ works that discuss the ways in which the navy and the exercise of naval power might reflect social constructs and images. Nor have any works been written about the navy and health, the environmental consequences of naval war, and war at sea as a form of disciplining bodies and applying violence to the body. Comradeship, as a key to understanding the thoughts, ethics and actions of sailors, is also missing from the Greek academic literature. The links between fighting effectiveness, morale and unit cohesion and their importance, as opposed to tactical sophistication, underline the value of the study of comradeship, since it bridges the ‘war and society’ and ‘face of battle’ approaches. The inherent strengths and adaptability of economies, societies and states may be more important than the particular characteristics of their naval systems, but this has also been ignored by the Greek academic historiography since 1989. The role of private entrepreneurs in mobilising resources for war at sea has not been attended, while occasional references to aggregate annual naval expenditures is no substitute for systematic quantitative analysis focusing on, for example, naval borrowing or the distribution of naval spending between personnel, shipbuilders, ship maintenance, and so on. The history of naval administration has hardly been studied in Greece, like in many other countries.93 92

93

Black, Rethinking Military History, 12. Thanos Veremis et al., Στρατός και πολιτική [The Army and Politics] (Athens: Sakoulas, 1989). Veremis, Ο στρατός στην Ελληνική Πολιτική. Από την Ανεξαρτησία στη Δημοκρατία [The Army in Greek Politics: From Independence to Democracy] (Athens: Courier, 2000). Antonis Kakaras, Οι Έλληνες Στρατιωτικοί  – Αξιωματικοί και Υπαξιωματικοί στη Μεταπολεμική Ελλάδα [Greek Military: Officers and Petty Officers in Post-world War Greece], 3 vols (Athens: Papazisis, 2006). Antonis Kakaras, Επαγγελματίες στρατιωτικοί υπό αυταρχικά καθεστώτα Αθήνα [The Military in Oppressive Regimes] (Ph.D., Panteion University, Athens, 2004). Antonis Kakaras, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό στη Δικτατορία, 1967–1974 [The Greek Navy in the Dictatorship] (Athens: n.p. 1997). Ioannis Malakasis, The Greek Naval Revolution of April 1944 (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 2001). Triantafylos Gerozisis, Το σώμα των αξιωματικών και η θέση του στη σύγχρονη ελληνική κοινωνία (1821–1975) [The Greek Officer Corps and Its Place in Modern Greek Society (1821–1975)] (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 1996). Malakasis, The Navy and Its Officer Corp in the Decade of the Thirties and up to the Eve of the Greco-Italian War (Ioannina: University of Ioannina 1995). Malakasis, The State of the Officer’s Corp in the Decade of the Thirties in Greece and the Advent of Right-wind (i.e., Wing) Militarism (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 1995). Black, Rethinking Military History, 50, 112. Sumida and Rosenberg, ‘Machines, Men, Manufacturing, Management, and Money’ in Hattendorf, Doing Naval History, 25, 29. George Dimakopoulos, Στρατιωτική και Θεσμική Αναδιοργάνωσις, 1909–1916, Σύστασις Ανωτάτου Μικτού Επιτελείου και Σχολών Επιτελών [Military and Structural Re-organization 1909–1916: The Establishment of the Joint Staff and Joint Staff Schools] (Athens, n.p., 2000). Dimitrios Matiatos, Πως χρηματοδοτούνταν οι Δημόσιες Δαπάνες κατά τον Αγώνα του 1821 [Financing the

The Development of Naval History in Greece

311

To summarise, Greek scholarly naval historiography is quite limited. More needs to be done, if it is to match the methodological evolution of international historiography in general and that of the international historiography of warin particular. 5

The Popular Naval History in Greece, 1989–2020

A brief reference is also due to the historiography of popular naval history in modern Greece, because it accounts for the majority of Greek naval historiography since 1989 and possesses certain unique characteristics. The popular naval history in Greece is the most chronologically balanced form of Greek naval historiography, since it has given proportionately greater coverage to, for example, the antiquity94 and the Greek War of Independence than either the corresponding Greek scholarly production or that of the Greek Ministry of Defence and its associated bodies. It has also differed, to a greater or lesser extent, from the two other forms of Greek naval historiography in being comparatively rich in biographies,95

94

95

Greek War of Independence] (Athens: n.p., 1990). Konstantinos Frangos, Η λεηλασία της άμυνας εξοπλισμοί (1981–2011) [Lutting the National Defence: Armaments, 1981–2011] (Athens: Govostis, 2012). Christy Emilio Ioannidou, Η πειρατεία στην αρχαία Ελλάδα [Piracy in Ancient Greece] (Athens: Historical Quest, 2017). Panagiotis Fourakis, Μέγα γαρ το της θαλάσσης κράτος. Η Ναυτική Ιστορία του Πελοποννησιακού Πολέμου [Naval History of the Peloponnesian War] (Athens: Smyrniotakis, 2016). Emmanuel Louzis, Dimitris Stamelos, Ἀνδρέας Μιαούλης: Ἔπος καί τραγωδία [Andreas Miaoulis: Epic and Tragedy] (Athens: Estia, 2003). Ioannis Fakidis, Ο Αρχιναύαρχος Λόρδος Κόχραν και η δράση του στην Ελληνική Επανάσταση [Admiral Lord Cochrane and His Participation in the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: Brazioti-Lousi, 1999). Manolis Gagakis, Νικόλαος Κρήτσκης: Ένας λησμονημένος ναύαρχος: Ένας ξεχασμένος ευεργέτης [Nikolaos Kritskis: A Forgotten Admiral and Benefactor] (Volos: Epikoinonia, 2003). Grigoris Demestichas, Ο Μακεδονομάχος Ναύαρχος Ιωάννης Ν. Δεμέστιχας: (1882–1960) [The Freedom Fighter in Macedonia, Admiral Ioannis Demestichas 1882–1960] (Athens: Nea Thesis, 2012). Nikolaos Nikolaidis, Ο ναύαρχος Γεώργιος Κακουλίδης: Μακεδονομάχος, επαναστάτης, βουλευτής, γερουσιαστής (1871–1946) [Admiral Georgios Kakoulidis: Fighter for the Union of Macedonia with Greece, Revolutionary, Member of Parliament, Senator, 1871–1946] (Athens: Paraskinio, 2001). Panagiotis Fourakis, Περικλής Αργυρόπουλος, Ο Θεμελιωτής της Ναυτικής Ισχύος [Perikles Argyropoulos, The Founder of Greek Sea Power] (Athens: Talos, 2008). Vassilios Iatridis, Από τον βυθό στον ουρανό: η βιογραφία του ήρωα Πλοιάρχου Μίλτωνα Ιατρίδη, με το υποβρύχιο ‘Παπανικολής’ [From the Bottom of the Sea to Heaven: The Biography of the Heroic Captain Milton Iatridis and the Submarine Papanikolis] (Athens: Pelasgos, 2019). Spyro Dimitrakopoulos, Μίλτων Ιατρίδης: Ο κυβερνήτης του υποβρυχίου ‘Παπανικολής’ (1940) [Milton Iatridis, the Commander of the Submarine Papanikolis]; (Gastouni 2007, Divri 2010): Proceedings of Α’ and Β’ Scientific Conferences of History and Culture in Helia (Divri:

312

Fotakis

memoirs96 and operations.97 Certain of these works have been written by

96

97

Cultural Centre of Divri, 2015). Konstantinos Tassas, Ο τελευταίος ήρωας του θρυλικού αντιτορπιλικού ‘Αδρίας’ L-67 Γιώργος Τασσάς [The Last Hero of the Legendary Destroyer Adrias L-67, Giorgos Tassas] (Athens: Gutenberg, 2019). Yegor Metaxas, Σημειώσεις του Υποπλοιάρχου του Ρωσικού Στόλου Γιεγκόρ Μεταξά: Η Ρωσική Ναυτική Μοίρα στα Ιόνια Νησιά 1798–1799 [Notes of the First Lieutenant of the Russian Fleet Giegor Metaxa: The Russian Squadron in the Ionian Islands 1798–1799] (Argostoli: Holy Diocese of Cephalonia, 2016). Emmanuel Louzis, Τα πολεμικά ημερολόγια του Σπετσιώτικου Βριγαντίνου ‘Επαμεινώνδας » του Κων/νου Ι Μπάμπα 1821–1825’ [The War Logbooks of the Spetsiot Brig Epameinondas of Constantine Babas, 1821–1825] (Spetses: General State Archives, 2007). Fontas Ladis, Προσωπικά ημερολόγια μελών των πληρωμάτων των Θωρηκτών ‘Αβέρωφ’ και ‘Ύδρα’ [Personal Diaries of Members of the Crew Members of the Battleships Averof and Hydra] (Athens: Livanis, 1993). Society for the Study of Greek History, 80 χρόνια από την παρουσία της Ελληνικής ναυτικής μοίρας στο Βόσπορο και 40 χρόνια από το θάνατο του Ναυάρχου Δημ. Παπαλεξόπουλου [80 Years Past the Presence of a Greek Squadron in the Bosphorus and 40 years Since the Death of Admiral Papalexopoulos] (Athens: Society for the Study of Greek History 1990). Grigoris Kartapanis, Οι επισκέψεις του Θωρηκτού Αβέρωφ στο Βόλο [The Battleship Averoff in Volos] (Volos: n.p. 1990). Karolos Moraites, Έλλη. Η τορπίλλη της ντροπής: Πως και γιατί οι Ιταλοί χτύπησαν το Δεκαπενταύγουστο του 1940 το Ελλη έξω από το λιμάνι της Τήνου [The Helle. The Torpedo of Shame: How and Why the Italians Attacked the Helle off the Port of Tinos in mid-August 1940] (Athens: Vasdekis 1998). Karolos Roussen, Περιπολία στο γερμανοκρατούμενο Αιγαίο, Μάρτιος 1944 [Patrol in the German-held Aegean Sea, March 1944] (Athens: n.p., 1993). Achilles Martzoukos, Στα Μπουγάζια του Αιγαίου [Through the Straits of the Aegean] (Athens: n.p., 1992). S. Botseas, Χαρά σ’τον π’Αρμενίζει [Joy to he who sails] (Athens: n.p., 1993). George Paspatis, Dead Reckoning: A Memoire of World War II in the Aegean (Athens: Libro, 2009). Themis Marinos, Μυστική Αποστολή στο Ιόνιο [Secret Mission in the Ionian Sea] (Athens: Ikaros, 2013). Tasos Bournias, Τότε που πολεμούσαμε στιγμές από τον Β Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [When We Fought: Second World War Moments] (Athens: n.p., 1996). Ioannis G. Antonopoulos, Η δράσις του Π/Π ΛΕΒΕΝΤΗΣ στην Κύπρο: (Φεβρουάριος 1964–Οκτώβριος 1965) [Naval Operations of the Leventis in Cyprus, February 1964–October 1965] (Volos: n.p., 2015). Christos Lymperis, Πορεία σε ταραγμένες θάλασσες [Sailing in Heavy Seas] (Athens: Piotita, 2001). Christos Lymperis, Εθνική Στρατηγική και Χειρισμός Κρίσεων [National Strategy and Crisis Management] (Athens: Piotita, 1997). Antonios Mastrakas, Αρμενίζοντας στα Πέλαγα των Ναυτικών Αναμνήσεων [Sailing in the Seas of My Naval Reminiscences] (Kifissia:n.p., 2008). Angelos Chrysikopoulos, Αναμνήσεις από το Κυπριακό Ναυτικό [Memories from the Cypriot Navy] (Athens: Korphi, 1995). Ioannis Stathopoulos, Το Κίνημα του Ναυτικού, Μάιος 1973. Προσωπική Μαρτυρία [The Naval Movement, May 1973: Personal Testimony] (Athens: Papazisis, 2003). Costas Gortzis, Ναύαρχος Νίκος Παππάς: Το βέλος στην καρδιά της δικτατορίας [Admiral Nick Pappas: The Arrow in the Heart of the Dictatorship] (Athens: Batsioulas, 2010). Dimitris Belezos and Ioannis Kotoulas, Η ναυμαχία της Ναυπάκτου Η χριστιανική Δύση αναχαιτίζει τον Οθωμανικό ιμπεριαλισμό [The Battle of Lepanto: The Christian West Stops Ottoman Imperialism] (Athens: Periskopio, 2005). Achilles Exarchos, Η ναυμαχία της Ναυπάκτου, 7 Οκτωβρίου 1571 [The Battle of Lepanto, 7 October 1571] (Athen: Society for the Study of Greek

The Development of Naval History in Greece

313

veterans whose reminiscences are popular in Greece, as in the United States, even if they frequently constitute uncritical and complete eulogies.98 It is also likely that they have been influenced by the resurgent Balkan nationalism of the early 1990s,99 which has partly led to the production in Greece of several works on the naval history of other countries. The scope of the latter works is largely practical, since they concentrate on operations and ships while adding a transnational element, which is singularly lacking from the rest of the Greek

98 99

History 2008). Kira Sinou, Eriκa Athanasiou, Στο σταυροδρόμι της ημισελήνου: Η ναυμαχία της Ναυπάκτου, 7 Οκτωβρίου 1571 [At the Crossroads of the Crescent: The Battle of Lepanto, October 7, 1571] (Athens: Kedros, 2010). Georgia Kakourou-Chroni and Pepi Gavala (eds), Η ναυμαχία του Ναβαρίνου: Πολλαπλές αναγνώσεις: Η συλλογή του Αντώνη Τάντουλου [The Battle of Navarino: Multiple Readings: The Collection of Antonis Tantoulos] (Sparta: National Gallery of Greece, 2009). Pericles Deligiannis, Ο ναυτικός αγώνας της Επανάστασης 1821–1829: Ηρωικά κατορθώματα και τραγικές καταστροφές [The Naval Struggle of the Greek Revolution of 1821–1829: Heroic Feats and Tragic Catastrophes] (Athens: Periskopio, 2009). Stamatios Manolas, Ἡ δράση τοῦ Πολεμικοῦ καί Ἐμπορικοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ Ναυτικοῦ κατά τόν Β ́ Παγκόσμιον Πόλεμον [The Operations of the Greek Navy and That of the Greek Merchant Marines During the Second World War] (Athens: Pitsilos, 1998). Efstathios Batis, Θάλασσα της Κατοχής: Ο άγνωστος πόλεμος στο Αιγαίο και το Ιόνιο (1940–1944) [Sea of Occupation: The Unknown War in the Aegean and Ionian Seas, 1940–1944] (Piraeus: JJ, 2004). Konstantinos Avtzigiannis, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό το 1940–1944 [The Navy in 1940–1944] (Athens: Epikoinonies 2001). Konstantinos Paradelis-Paizis et al., Β Παγκόσμιος Πόλεμος, Η δράση του Πολεμικού μας Ναυτικού 1939–1945 [World War II, The Operations of Our Navy, 1939–1945] (Athens: Society for the Study of Greek History, 2003). Dimitrios Loris, Ελληνικό ναυτικό 1940–1944: Πολεμώντας με αυτοθυσία τις δυνάμεις του Αξονα [Greek Navy 1940–1944: Fighting against the Axis with Self-sacrifice] (Athens: Periskopio, 2010). Nikos Pigadas, Τορπίλες και συρματοπλέγματα. Έλληνες ναυτικοί αιχμάλωτοι πολέμου [Torpedoes and Barbed Wire: Greek Sailors Prisoners of War] (Athens: Batsioulas, 2010). Dimitrios Papadimitriou, Ελληνικό Λαϊκό Απελευθερωτικό Ναυτικό, 1943–1945) [Greek People’s Liberation Navy, 1943–1945] (Athens: Amyntiki Grammi, 2007). Antonis Aliprantis, Μυστική Συμμαχική Βάση Αντίπαρου (Athens: n.p., 1992) [Secret Allied Base of Antiparos]. Batis, Επιχείρηση Φλεγόμενη Βάτος – Ο Άγνωστος Πόλεμος στο Ελληνικό Αρχιπέλαγος [Operation Burning Bush: The Unknown War in the Greek Archipelago] (Athens: Pitsilos, 1996). Black, Rethinking Military History, 43, 45. Antonis Liakos, ‘Το Ζήτημα της “Συνέχειας” στη Νεοελληνική Ιστοριογραφία’ [The Question of Continuity in Modern Greek Historiography] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 1, 62–64. Filippos Iliou, ‘Ιστοριογραφικές Ανανεώσεις’ [Historiographical Updates] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 1, 401.

314

Fotakis

naval historiography.100 Works on naval organisation101 can also be found in the popular Greek naval history since 1989. Finally, popular naval historiography in Greece covers more than any other form of Greek naval historiography on naval weapons102 shipbuilding,103 the Greek participation in naval exploration104 and the contribution of women105 and the merchant marines106 to the naval wars of Hellenism. 100 Evangelos Pagotsis, Η ναυμαχία της Τσουσίμα, 27–28, Μαΐου 1905: Η ανατολή του ιαπωνικού ήλιου [The Battle of Tsushima, May 27–28, 1905: The Rising Sun of Japan] (Athens: Amyntiki Grammi 2006). Pagotsis, Γιουτλάνδη – 1916: Η μεγαλύτερη ναυμαχία επιφανείας [Jutland – 1916: The Largest Naval Battle of the Dreadnought Era] (Athens: Epikoinonies, 2002). Sotirios Vourliotis, Γερμανικό ναυτικό 1936–1945: Οι πειρατές του Γ΄ Ράιχ [German Navy 1936–1945: The Pirates of the Third Reich] (Athens: Periskopio, 2009). Dimitrios Stavropoulos et al., Περλ Χάρμπορ: Ο απόλυτος αιφνιδιασμός [Pearl Harbor: The Absolute Surprise Attack] (Athens: Periskopio 2001). Elias Maglinis et al., Μιντγουέι 1942: Η πιο κρίσιμη αεροναυμαχία του Β’ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου [Midway 1942: The Key Aero-naval Battle of the Second World War] (Athens: Periskopio, 2006). Elias Papathanasis, Καμικάζι, Ο θεϊκός άνεμος (Athens: Periskopio, 2006) (Kamikaze, The Divine Wind). Stavropoulos and Konstantinidis, Αεροπλανοφόρα: Κυρίαρχοι των θαλασσών [Aircraft Carriers: Sovereigns of the Seas] (Athens: 11 Aviation Publications, 2007). 101 Sifis Manousogiannakis, Το Κυπριακό ναυτικό μέχρι το 1974: Συγκρότηση  – Πραξικόπημα  – Τουρκική Εισβολή [The Cypriot Navy Until 1974: Constitution-Dictatorship and the Turkish Invasion] (Athens: n.p. 2016). 102 Christos Lazos, Ναυτική τεχνολογία στην αρχαία Ελλάδα [Naval Technology in Ancient Greece] (Athens: Aiolos, 1996). Alexandros Madonis and George Mastrogeorgiou, Ελληνικά Υποβρύχια, 1885–2010 [Hellenic Submarines, 1885–2010] (Athens: Kleidarithmos, 2010). 103 Aris Tsikontiris et al. (eds), Πειρατικά και Κουρσάρικα σκαριά των θαλασσών μας, 18ος–19ος αιώνας: Ένα ταξίδι στον κόσμο των πειρατικών και κουρσάρικων σκαριών και στη ζωή των προγόνων μας [Piratical and Corsair Vessels in our Seas, 18th and 19th Century: A Voyage in the World of the Ships of Pirates and Corsairs in the Life of Our Predecessors] (Athens: Arteon, 2016). Tsikontiris et al. (eds), Πλεούμενα των λιμνών και ποταμών του τόπου μας 18ος–20ος αιώνας: Ένα ταξίδι στον κόσμο των ξύλινων σκαριών των γλυκών/υφάλμυρων νερών και του πολιτισμού μας [Vessels of the Lakes and the Rivers, 18th–20th Centuries: A Voyage in the World of Wooden Vessels] (Athens: Arteon, 2015). Epameinondas Karvelis (ed.), Φύλλα ιστορίας: από τη ναυτική παράδοση του Αιτωλικού και τα ομοιώματα πλοίων του Δ. Μάρα [The Naval Tradition of Etolikon and the Ship Models of Maras] (Messolonghi: TEI, 2012). 104 Bartholomew Lazarus, Η διαχρονική σχέσις των Ελλήνων με την θάλασσαν: Έλληνες θαλασσοπόροι-εξερευνηταί και άποικοι (Μια ιστορία χωρίς αρχήν και τέλος) [The Eternal Greek Bond with the Sea: Greek Seafarers, Explorers and Colonialists, A Story without Beginning and End] (Athens: Pelasgos, 2014). 105 Annita Prassa, Οι αγωνίστριες του ‘21: Μπουμπουλίνα, Μαυρογένους, Καΐρη, Βισβίζη [Female Freedom Fighters of the Greek Revolution of 1821: Bouboulina, Mavrogenous, Kairi, Visvizi] (Athens: Periskopio, 2010). Koula Xiradaki, Γυναίκες του ‘21: Προσφορές, ηρωισμοί και θυσίες: Συμβολή στην έρευνα [Women of the Greek Revolution of 1821: Their Contribution, Heroism and Sacrifice: Contribution to Ongoing Research] (Athens: Dodoni, 1995). 106 Christos Dounis, Εις μνήμην Ναυτικοί και πλοία που χάθηκαν στο Δεύτερο Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο 1939–1945 [In Memoriam: Lost Sailors and Ships during the Second World War 1939–1945] (Athens: Pitsilos, 1997). Christos Dounis, Η ελληνική ναυτιλία κατά τον Πρώτο Παγκόσμιο

The Development of Naval History in Greece

315

To sum it up, popular naval historiography in Greece since 1989 supplements thematically and chronologically the corresponding historiography of the Ministry of Defence and that of the Greek academia. Its scope is both practical and ideological, as it seeks lessons learnt and national inspiration from past naval glories and adversities. It is a sizeable and diverse field historiographically. 6

Conclusion

The field of naval history in Greece has not been left unattended since 1989. On the contrary, it has attracted considerable interest from the public and independent authors, serious attention from the Greek state and certain good work by the Greek academia. Much is left to be done, though, if its development is to match recent advances in the naval historiography of the West. Despite the recent economic woes of Greece, modern Greek naval history will probably develop further, if only because of the many, chronic security challenges that Greece is facing. Bibliography Γ.Ε.Ν., ΕΚΠ Άρης  – Λεύκωμα Παροπλισμού [Decommissioning HNS Arιs: Photographic Album] (Athens Hellenic Navy General Staff, 2002). Aliprantis Antonis, Μυστική Συμμαχική Βάση Αντίπαρου (Athens: n.p., 1992) [Secret Allied Base of Antiparos]. Πόλεμο: Ιστορικό απωλεσθέντων πλοίων [Greek Shipping During the First World War: Chronicle of the Lost Ships] (Athens: n.p., 1991). Christos Dounis, Ἐν καιρῷ πολέμου: Το Ελληνικό Εμπορικό Ναυτικό στη δίνη δύο παγκοσμίων πολέμων: Τα απωλεσθέντα στους ωκεανούς ποντοπόρα πλοία [In Wartime: The Greek Merchant Navy in the Midst of Two World Wars: Lost Ships in the Oceans] (Piraeus: J.J., 2003). George Kolovos, Η Δράση του Ελληνικού Ναυτικού (εμπορικού και πολεμικού) κατά τη διάρκεια του Β Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου [The Operations of the Greek Navy and That of the Greek Merchant Marine During the Second World War] (Athens: n.p., 2009). Konstantinos Paizis-Paradelis, Το τίμημα του πολέμου. Απώλειες και θυσίες της Ελληνικής Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας στον Β Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [The Price of War: Losses and Sacrifices of the Greek Merchant Marine in the Second World War] (Athens: Society for the Study of Greek History, 2004). Mattheos Los, Η σιωπηλή Αναμέτρηση. Η ελληνική ναυτιλία κατά τον Β Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [Silent Showdown: The Greek Shipping During the Second World War] (Piraeus: Akritas, 1998). Ioannis Malakasis, Η συνεισφορά της ελληνικής εμπορικής ναυτιλίας στην πολεμική προσπάθεια του έθνους: Οκτώβριος 1940–Μάιος 1941 [The Contribution of the Greek Merchant Marine to the War Effort of the Nation: October 1940  – May 1941] (Ioannina:University of Ioannina, 1994).

316

Fotakis

Antonopoulos Ioannis G., Η δράσις του Π/Π ΛΕΒΕΝΤΗΣ στην Κύπρο: (Φεβρουάριος 1964–Οκτώβριος 1965) [Naval Operations of the Leventis in Cyprus, February 1964– October 1965] (Volos: n.p. 2015). Apostolatos Gerasimos, Ο Πλωτάρχης Γεώργιος Μπλέσσας και το Αντιτορπιλικό Βασίλισσα Όλγα [Lieutenant Commander Blessas and the Destroyer Queen Olga] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 1997). Avtzigiannis Konstantinos, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό το 1940–1944 [The Navy in 1940–1944] (Athens: Εpikoinonies, 2001). Batis Efstathios, Επιχείρηση Φλεγόμενη Βάτος  – Ο Άγνωστος Πόλεμος στο Ελληνικό Αρχιπέλαγος [Operation Burning Bush: The Unknown War in the Greek Archipelago] (Athens: Pitsilos, 1996). Batis Efstathios, Θάλασσα της Κατοχής: Ο άγνωστος πόλεμος στο Αιγαίο και το Ιόνιο (1940– 1944) [Sea of Occupation: The Unknown War in the Aegean and Ionian Seas, 1940– 1944] (Piraeus: JJ, 2004). Belezos Dimitris and Ioannis Kotoulas, Η ναυμαχία της Ναυπάκτου Η χριστιανική Δύση αναχαιτίζει τον Οθωμανικό ιμπεριαλισμό [The Battle of Lepanto: The Christian West Stops Ottoman Imperialism] (Athens: Periskopio, 2005). Black Jeremy, Rethinking Military History (London and New York: Routledge, 2004). Botseas S., Χαρά σ’τον π’Αρμενίζει [ Joy to he who sails] (Athens: n.p., 1993). Boulotis Christos, Ναυς: Πλοία και ναυπηγική στον Ελληνικό κόσμο [Ships and Shipbuilding in the Greek World] (Athens: Polaris, 2014). Bournias Tasos, Τότε που πολεμούσαμε στιγμές από τον Β Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [When We Fought: Second World War Moments] (Athens: n.p., 1996). Bregianni Katerina, Γενική Ιστορία της Ευρώπης. Ιστορία και Ιστοριογραφία: Νεότερες Προσεγγίσεις [A General History of Europe. History and Historiography: New Approaches] (Patras: Hellenic Open University, 2008). Charatsis Stylianos, Η Πρώτη Επέμβαση. Η άγνωστη δράση του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού στην Μεσημβρινή Ρωσία 1918–20 [The First Intervention: The Little Known Naval Operations of the Hellenic Navy in Southern Russia, 1918–1920] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 1997). Charatsis Stylianos, Απώλειες ελληνικών Πολεμικών Πλοίων λόγω ατυχημάτων στον 19ο και 20ο αιώνα [Greek Naval Accidents during the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2017). Chrysikopoulos Angelos, Αναμνήσεις από το Κυπριακό Ναυτικό [Memories from the Cypriot Navy] (Athens: Korphi, 1995). Citino Robert, ‘Military Histories Old and New: A Reintroduction’, The American Historical Review 112/4 (2007), 1070–1090. Daloumis Elias (ed.), Γ. Αβέρωφ, 100 χρόνια [Centennial of HNS G. Averoff ] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2011).

The Development of Naval History in Greece

317

Daloumis Elias, Τα Πλοία του Ναυτικού: 1826–2017 [Naval Ships: 1829–2001] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2017). Deligiannis Pericles, Ο ναυτικός αγώνας της Επανάστασης 1821–1829: Ηρωικά κατορθώματα και τραγικές καταστροφές [The Naval Struggle of the Greek Revolution of 1821–1829: Heroic Feats and Tragic Catastrophes] (Athens: Periskopio, 2009). Demestichas Grigoris, Ο Μακεδονομάχος Ναύαρχος Ιωάννης Ν. Δεμέστιχας: (1882–1960) [The Freedom Fighter in Macedonia, Admiral Ioannis Demestichas 1882–1960] (Athens: Nea Thesi, 2012). Diamantis Aristidis and Ioannis Dodos, 3000 χρόνια Ελληνική Ναυτική Ιατρική [3,000 Years of Greek Naval Medicine] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 2000). Diamantis Aristidis, Ναύαρχος Παύλος Κουντουριώτης (1855–1935): μια ψυχογραφική προσέγγιση [Admiral Pavlos Koundouriotis 1855–1935, A Psychological Portrait] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2013). Dimakopoulos George, Στρατιωτική και Θεσμική Αναδιοργάνωσις, 1909–1916, Σύστασις Ανωτάτου Μικτού Επιτελείου και Σχολών Επιτελών [Military and Structural Reorganization 1909–1916: The Establishment of the Joint Staff and Joint Staff Schools] (Athens, n.p., 2000). Dimitrakopoulos Anastasios (ed.), Ο Πρώτος Βαλκανικός Πόλεμος μέσα από τις σελίδες του περιοδικού L’Illustration [The First Balkan War as Narrated in the French Journal L’Illustration] (Athens: Hellenic Committee of Military History, 1992). Dimitrakopoulos Anastasios (ed.), Ο Α΄ Βαλκανικός Πόλεμος μέσα από τα αρχεία της Ιστορικής Υπηρεσίας του γαλλικού ναυτικού [The First Balkan War through the Archives of the Historical Service of the French Navy] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum , 1996). Dimitrakopoulos Anastasios, Βιογραφικό Λεξικό των Αποφοίτων της Σχολής Ναυτικών Δοκίμων. Οι Τάξεις Εισόδου 1884–1950, I, Α–Κ., vol. II, Λ–Ω. vol. III, Οι Τάξεις Εισόδου 1951– 1973, 3 vols [Biographical Lexicon of the Graduates of the Hellenic Naval Academy, 1884–1977] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 2006–7). Dimitrakopoulos Anastasios, Λεύκωμα φωτογραφιών των αποφοίτων της Σχολής Ναυτικών Δοκίμων: Οι τάξεις εισόδου 1884–1973 [Photographic Album of the Graduates of the Hellenic Naval Academy 1884–1977] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff , 2009). Dimitrakopoulos Anastasios, Β’ Παγκόσμιος Πόλεμος, Οι πολεμιστές του Ναυτικού Θυμούνται [The Second World War: The Fighters of the Hellenic Navy Remember], 5 vols (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2011). Dimitrakopoulos Anastasios (ed.), 1912–1913, Εκατό Χρόνια από τη Ναυτική Εποποιΐα των Βαλκανικών Πολέμων [1912–1913, A Century Since the Naval Epic of the Balkan Wars] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2012). Dimitrakopoulos Anastasios, Ιστορία του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού 1874–1912 [History of the Greek Navy, 1874–1912], 2 vols (Piraeus:Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2015).

318

Fotakis

Dimitrakopoulos Spyros, Μίλτων Ιατρίδης: Ο κυβερνήτης του υποβρυχίου ‘Παπανικολής’ (1940) [Milton Iatridis, the Commander of the Submarine Papanikolis]; (Gastouni 2007, Divri 2010): Proceedings of A’ and B’ Scientific Conferences of History and Culture in Helia (Divri: Cultural Centre of Divri 2015). Dimitriadis Konstantinos and Grigoris Demestichas (eds), Ίδρυση του Κυπριακού Ναυτικού (1964–1966) [The Establishment of the Cypriot Navy (1964–1966)] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy 2011). Dounis Christos, Η ελληνική ναυτιλία κατά τον Πρώτο Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο: Ιστορικό απωλεσθέντων πλοίων [Greek Shipping During the First World War: Chronicle of the Lost Ships] (Athens: n.p., 1991). Dounis Christos, Εις μνήμην Ναυτικοί και πλοία που χάθηκαν στο Δεύτερο Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο 1939–1945 [In Memoriam: Lost Sailors and Ships during the Second World War 1939– 1945] (Athens: Pitsilos, 1997). Dounis Christos, Ἐν καιρῷ πολέμου: Το Ελληνικό Εμπορικό Ναυτικό στη δίνη δύο παγκοσμίων πολέμων: Τα απωλεσθέντα στους ωκεανούς ποντοπόρα πλοία [In Wartime: The Greek Merchant Navy in the Midst of Two World Wars: Lost Ships in the Oceans] (Piraeus: J.J., 2003). Society for the Study of Greek History , 80 χρόνια από την παρουσία της Ελληνικής ναυτικής μοίρας στο Βόσπορο και 40 χρόνια από το θάνατο του Ναυάρχου Δημ. Παπαλεξόπουλου [80 Years Past the Presence of a Greek Squadron in the Bosphorus and 40 years Since the Death of Admiral Papalexopoulos] (Athens: Society for the Study of Greek History, 1990). Exarchos Achilles, Η ναυμαχία της Ναυπάκτου, 7 Οκτωβρίου 1571 [The Battle of Lepanto, 7 October 1571] (Athens: Society for the Study of Greek History 2008). Fakalou Ekaterini, Κατάλογος αρχειακού υλικού Πολεμικού Ναυτικού, 1940–1945 [Catalogue of the Archival Material of the Greek Navy, 1940–1945], 3 vols (Athens:History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2008). Fakalou Ekaterini, Τα πολεμικά πλοία της Ελλάδας [Greek Warships], 4 vols (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2008). Fakidis Ioannis, Ο Αρχιναύαρχος Λόρδος Κόχραν και η δράση του στην Ελληνική Επανάσταση [Admiral Lord Cochrane and His Participation in the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: Brazioti-Lousi, 1999). Fotakis Zisis, Greek Naval Strategy and Policy, 1910–1919 (London and New York: Routledge, 2005). Fotakis Zisis, The Greek Navy in the Balkan Wars, 1912–1913 (Athens: Militos, 2011). Fotakis Zisis, The First World War in the Mediterranean and the Role of Lemnos (Athens: Herodotos, 2018). Fourakis Panagiotis, ‘La Constitution de la Marine de Guerre Hellénique et la Force Naval de la Grèce (1900–1913)’ (PhD thesis, University of Sorbonne, 2008).

The Development of Naval History in Greece

319

Fourakis Panagiotis, Περικλής Αργυρόπουλος, Ο Θεμελιωτής της Ναυτικής Ισχύος [Perikles Argyropoulos, The Founder of Greek Sea Power] (Athens: Talos, 2008). Fourakis Panagiotis, Μέγα γαρ το της θαλάσσης κράτος. Η Ναυτική Ιστορία του Πελοποννησιακού Πολέμου [Naval History of the Peloponnesian War] (Athens: Smyrniotakis, 2016). Frangos Konstantinos, Η λεηλασία της άμυνας εξοπλισμοί (1981–2011) [Lutting the National Defence: Armaments, 1981–2011] (Athens: Govostis, 2012). Gagakis Manolis, Νικόλαος Κρήτσκης: Ένας λησμονημένος ναύαρχος: Ένας ξεχασμένος ευεργέτης [Nikolaos Kritskis: A Forgotten Admiral and Benefactor] (Volos: Epikoinonia, 2003). Galani Katerina and Gelina Harlaftis, Greek Shipping During the Greek War of Independence: The Merchant and Naval Fleet (1821–1831) (Heraklion: Crete University Press, 2021). Galon Dimitrios, Διαβαίνοντας τις ατραπούς του θρύλου: Η δράση και η βύθιση του υποβρυχίου Β. Π. Κατσώνης (Υ1) ιδωμένη μέσα από τα ιστορικά αρχεία και τα ημερολόγια πολέμου όλων των επιχειρησιακά εμπλεκόμενων πλευρών [Crossing the Paths of a Legend: The Naval Operations and Sinking of the HNS Katsonis as Reported in the Archives and Logbooks of All Interested Parties] (Athens: ELINIS, 2020). Gardika-Katsiadaki Eleni and George Charonitis, Το Θωρηκτό ‘Γεώργιος Αβέρωφ’ κατά τους Βαλκανικούς Πολέμους 1912–1913 [The Armoured Cruiser Georgios Averoff in the Balkan Wars, 1912–1913] (Athens: National Research Foundation Eleutherios Venizelos, Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive & Benaki Museum, 2002). Gerontas Panagiotis, Μεθ’ ορμής ακαθέκτου: Επίτομη ιστορία του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού 1821– 1945 [At Full Speed: Epitome of the History of the Navy 1821–1945] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2016). Gerozisis Triantafylos, Το σώμα των αξιωματικών και η θέση του στη σύγχρονη ελληνική κοινωνία (1821–1975) [The Greek Officer Corps and Its Place in Modern Greek Society (1821– 1975)] (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 1996). Giakoumakis Dimitrios, Θαλασσινά Χαρακτικά [Sea Engravings] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 1996). Giakoumakis Dimitrios, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό στην Ελληνική Τέχνη [The Greek Navy in Greek Art] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 1996). Giannarakos Leonidas, Μια ιστορία όπως δεν γράφτηκε. 60 χρόνια μετά: Το ιστορικό των ναυτοπαίδων, που το 1952 συντάραξε το πανελλήνιο με την ομαδική απείθεια [A Story in a Way That Has Never Been Recorded Before. Sixty Years Later. The Case of the School for the Naval NCO s That Made a Sensation in Greece with Its Insubordination] (Athens: Lexitypon, 2012). Gortzis Costas, Ναύαρχος Νίκος Παππάς: Το βέλος στην καρδιά της δικτατορίας [Admiral Nick Pappas: The Arrow in the Heart of the Dictatorship] (Athens: Batsioulas, 2010). Hagan Kenneth and Mark Shulman, ‘Mahan Plus One Hundred: The Current State of American Naval History’ in John Hattendorf (ed.), Ubi Sumus? The State of Naval and Maritime History (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College Press, 1994), 379–415.

320

Fotakis

Halpern Paul, ‘Comparative Naval History’ in John B. Hattendorf (ed.), Doing Naval History, Essays Toward Improvement (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College, 1995), 75–92. Harlaftis Gelina, Ιστορία της Ελληνόκτητης Ναυτιλίας19ος και 20ος αιώνας [History of the Greek-owned Shipping during the 19th and the 20th Centuries] (Athens: Nefeli, 2001). Harlaftis Gelina, ‘Η ναυτιλιακή ιστορία εν πλω και υπ’ ατμόν’ [Maritime History at Sea and at Full Steam] in Paschalis M. Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 425–45. Harlaftis Gelina and Katerina Papakonstantinou (eds), Η ναυτιλία των Ελλήνων 1700– 1821: Ο αιώνας της ακμής πριν από την Επανάσταση [Greek Merchant Shipping 1700–1821: A Century of Growth Before the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: Kedros, 2013). Hattendorf John, ‘Introduction’ in John Hattendorf (ed.), Ubi Sumus? The State of Naval and Maritime History (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College Press, 1994), 1–7. HCMH, Acta of the Twenty-second Congress of the ICMH, 1987 (Athens, 1988). HCMH, Acta of the International Symposium on Military History Lefkos Pyrgos 91 and Lato 91 (Athens, 1991). HCMH, Acta of the International Symposium of Military History ‘Moundros 92’ – ‘Pavlos Melas 92’. The Great National Sally 1912–13: The First Balkan War (Athens, 1992). HCMH, The Eastern Question, the Greeks and the Romanians (1880–1923) (Athens, 2001). HCMH, Acta of the Twenty-seventh Congress of the ICMH (Athens, 2002). HCMH, Acta of the Hellenic–Israeli Seminar of 2004: Asymmetric Threats (Athens, 2004). HCMH, The Russian–Greek Military Relationship from the Antiquity to Nowadays (Athens, 2004). HCMH, Acta of the Conference Development and Exploitation on Military History Lessons in the Area of Eastern Mediterranean (Athens, 2006). Hellenic National Defence General Staff, Armed Forces Entities on Military History (Athens: Hellenic Commission on Military History [HCMH], 2007). History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2011 Annual Report (Athens, 20 December 2011). Iatridis Vassilios, Από τον βυθό στον ουρανό: η βιογραφία του ήρωα Πλοιάρχου Μίλτωνα Ιατρίδη, με το υποβρύχιο ‘Παπανικολής’ [From the Bottom of the Sea to Heaven: The Biography of the Heroic Captain Milton Iatridis and the Submarine Papanikolis] (Athens: Pelasgos, 2019). Iliopoulos Ilias, Γεωπολιτική των θαλάσσιων δυνάμεων: Η γεωγραφία της Βρεττανικής Ισχύος 1815–1956, με συνεκτίμηση του Ανατολικού Ζητήματος και των Ανταγωνισμών Ισχύος στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο [Geopolitics of the Naval Powers: The Geography of the British Power 1815–1956 in Consideration of the Eastern Question and the Power Struggles in the Eastern Mediterranean] (Athens: Limon, 2017). Iliou Filippos, ‘Ιστοριογραφικές Ανανεώσεις, το Βιβλίο, οι Αναγνώστες, η Ανάγνωση: το ποσοτικό στο τρίτο επίπεδο’ [Historiographical Renewals: The Book, the Readers, and

The Development of Naval History in Greece

321

the Reading: Quantity in the Third Level], in Paschalis Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 1 (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 397–403. Ioannidou Christy Emilio, Η πειρατεία στην αρχαία Ελλάδα [Piracy in Ancient Greece] (Athens: Historical Quest, 2017). Ioannidou Christy Emilio, Τριήρης: τακτική και επιχειρησιακό περιβάλλον στην αρχαία Ελλάδα [Trireme: Operational and Tactical Environment in Ancient Greece] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2016). Kakaras Antonis, Οι Έλληνες Στρατιωτικοί – Αξιωματικοί και Υπαξιωματικοί στη Μεταπολεμική Ελλάδα [Greek Military: Officers and Petty Officers in Post-world War Greece], 3 vols (Athens: Papazisis, 2006). Kakaras Antonis, Επαγγελματίες στρατιωτικοί υπό αυταρχικά καθεστώτα Αθήνα [The Military in Oppressive Regimes] (Ph.D., Panteion University, Athens, 2004). Antonis Kakaras, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό στη Δικτατορία, 1967–1974 [The Greek Navy in the Dictatorship] (Athens: n.p., 1997). Kakourou-Chroni Georgia and Pepi Gavala (eds), Η ναυμαχία του Ναβαρίνου: Πολλαπλές αναγνώσεις: Η συλλογή του Αντώνη Τάντουλου [The Battle of Navarino: Multiple Readings: The Collection of Antonis Tantoulos] (Sparta: National Gallery of Greece, 2009). Kalyvas Stathis, ‘Εμφύλιος Πόλεμος (1943–1949): το τέλος των Μύθων και η Στροφή προς το Μαζικό Επίπεδο’ [The Greek Civil War, 1943–1949: The End of Myths and the Turn to the Level of the History of the Masses] in Paschalis Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 1 (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 597–628. Kartapanis Grigoris, Οι επισκέψεις του Θωρηκτού Αβέρωφ στο Βόλο [The Battleship Averoff in Volos] (Volos: n.p., 1990). Karvelis Epameinondas (ed.), Φύλλα ιστορίας: από τη ναυτική παράδοση του Αιτωλικού και τα ομοιώματα πλοίων του Δ. Μάρα [The Naval Tradition of Etolikon and the Ship Models of Maras] (Messolonghi: TEI, 2012). Kennedy Paul, ‘Levels of Approach and Contexts in Naval History: Admiral Tirpitz and the Origins of Fascism’ in John B. Hattendorf (ed.), Doing Naval History, Essays Toward Improvement (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College, 1995), 143–149. Kolovos George, Η Δράση του Ελληνικού Ναυτικού (εμπορικού και πολεμικού) κατά τη διάρκεια του Β Παγκoσμίου Πολέμου [The Operations of the Greek Navy and That of the Greek Merchant Marine During the Second World War] (Athens: n.p., 2009). Kremmidas Vassilis, ‘Απολογιζόμαστε και Χαιρετούμε’ [Review and Farewell] in Paschalis Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 2 (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 735–740. Lachanos Nikolaos, Δόξα και Δάφνες. Τιμητικές Διακρίσεις που απενεμήθησαν εις το προσωπικό του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού κατά τον Πόλεμο 1940–1945 [Glory and Laurels: Honours Awarded to the Naval Personnel During the War, 1940–1945] (Athens: HMM, 1991).

322

Fotakis

Ladis Fontas, Προσωπικά ημερολόγια μελών των πληρωμάτων των Θωρηκτών ‘Αβέρωφ’ και ‘Ύδρα’ [Personal Diaries of Members of the Crew Members of the Battleships Averof and Hydra] (Athens: Livanis, 1993). Lagaras Evangelos, Ναυτικές Επιχειρήσεις κατά τη Μάχη της Κρήτης [Naval Operations during the Battle of Crete] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 1991). Lazarus Bartholomew, Η διαχρονική σχέσις των Ελλήνων με την θάλασσαν: Έλληνες θαλασσοπόροι-εξερευνηταί και άποικοι (Μια ιστορία χωρίς αρχήν και τέλος) [The Eternal Greek Bond with the Sea: Greek Seafarers, Explorers and Colonialists, A Story without Beginning and End] (Athens: Pelasgos, 2014). Lazos Christos, Ναυτική τεχνολογία στην αρχαία Ελλάδα [Naval Technology in Ancient Greece] (Athens: Aiolos, 1996). Liakos Antonis, ‘Το Ζήτημα της “Συνέχειας” στη Νεοελληνική Ιστοριογραφία’ [The Question of Continuity in Modern Greek Historiography] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece], vol. 1 (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 53–65. Liata Eutychia D., Εκ του υστερήματος αρμάτωσαν: η φρεγάτα ‘Τιμολέων’ στην επανάσταση του 1821 [Frigate Timoleon in the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: Hellenic National Research Foundation, 2020). Lismanis Dimitrios, Υδραίοι Πρόδρομοι και Ναυμάχοι του Εικοσιένα. Επιφανείς και αφανείς. Ιστορική και Γενεαλογική Έρευνα 14ος–20ος αιώνας [Hydriotes, Forerunners and Naval Fighters in the Greek War of Independence] (Athens:History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2007). Loris Dimitrios, Ελληνικό ναυτικό 1940–1944: Πολεμώντας με αυτοθυσία τις δυνάμεις του Αξονα [Greek Navy 1940–1944: Fighting against the Axis with Self-sacrifice] (Athens: Periskopio, 2010). Los Mattheos, Η σιωπηλή Αναμέτρηση. Η ελληνική ναυτιλία κατά τον Β Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [Silent Showdown: The Greek Shipping During the Second World War] (Piraeus: Akritas, 1998). Loukas Ioannis (ed.), Πρακτικά Πέμπτης Πελαγικής Συνάντησης “Ασφάλεια και Πειρατεία στην Ανοιχτή Θάλασσα. Η Σύγχρονη Νομική Προσέγγιση μέσα από τη Σύμβαση του Montego Bay [Maritime Security and Piracy in Open Seas According to the Montego Bay Convention] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 2003). Loukas Ioannis (ed.), NATO’s Maritime Power 1949–1990, Proceedings of the Fourth Pelagic Meeting (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 2002). Loukas Ioannis (ed.), Πρακτικά Β Πελαγικής Συνάντησης, Η Ανατολική Μεσόγειος από τον Ψυχρό Πόλεμο στο Νέο Διεθνές Σύστημα [The Eastern Mediterranean during the Cold War and the 1990s] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 1999). Loukas Ioannis (ed.), Πρακτικά Α’ Πελαγικής Συνάντησης Ο ελληνισμός, η Δύση και η κατανομή της Θαλάσσιας Ισχύος στον Ευρασιατικό χώρο [Hellenism, the West and the Balance of Sea Power in Eurasia], 2 vols (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 1998).

The Development of Naval History in Greece

323

Loukas Ioannis, Θαλάσσια ισχύς και ελληνικό κράτος: Ο στόλος της μεγάλης ιδέας [Sea Power and the Greek State: The War Fleet of Irredentism] (Athens: Epikoinonies, 1998). Loukos Christos, Η Επανάσταση του 1821. Από κυρίαρχο αντικείμενο έρευνας και διδασκαλίας στην Υποβάθμιση και Σιωπή [The Greek War of Independence: From Dominant Subject of Teaching and Research to Retreat and Silence] in Kitromilidis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας, vol. 1. (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 579–594. Louzis Emmanuel, Τα πολεμικά ημερολόγια του Σπετσιώτικου Βριγαντίνου ‘Επαμεινώνδας» του Κων/νου Ι Μπάμπα 1821–1825’ [The War Logbooks of the Spetsiot Brig Epameinondas of Constantine Babas, 1821–1825] (Spetses: General State Archives, 2007). Lymperis Christos, Εθνική Στρατηγική και Χειρισμός Κρίσεων [National Strategy and Crisis Management] (Athens: Piotita, 1997). Lymperis Christos, Πορεία σε ταραγμένες θάλασσες [Sailing in Heavy Seas] (Athens: Piotita, 2001). Madonis Alexandros and George Mastrogeorgiou, Ελληνικά Υποβρύχια, 1885–2010 [Hellenic Submarines, 1885–2010] (Athens: Kleidarithmos, 2010). Maglinis Elias et al., Μιντγουέι 1942: Η πιο κρίσιμη αεροναυμαχία του Β’ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου [Midway 1942: The Key Aero-naval Battle of the Second World War] (Athens: Periskopio, 2006). Makkas Nikolaos, O Ελληνικός Στόλος στις αρχές του 20ου αιώνα, Φωτογραφικές μαρτυρίες [Photographical Testimonies of the Hellenic Warfleet at the Beginning of the 20th Century] (Athens: Hellenic Historical and Ethnological Society 1990). Malakasis Ioannis, Η συνεισφορά της ελληνικής εμπορικής ναυτιλίας στην πολεμική προσπάθεια του έθνους: Οκτώβριος 1940–Μάιος 1941 [The Contribution of the Greek Merchant Marine to the War Effort of the Nation: October 1940–May 1941] (Ioannina: University of Ioannina 1994). Malakasis Ioannis, The Navy and Its Officer Corp in the Decade of the Thirties and up to the Eve of the Greco-Italian War (Ioannina: University of Ioannina 1995). Malakasis Ioannis, The State of the Officer’s Corp in the Decade of the Thirties in Greece and the Advent of Right-wind (i.e. Wing) Militarism (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 1995). Malakasis Ioannis, Η Δράση της Ελληνικής Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας στη Μέση Ανατολή [Greek Maritime Operations in the Middle East During the Second World War] (Ioannina: n.p., 1995). Malakasis Ioannis, Το Ναυτικό στο Δεύτερο Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [The Greek Navy in the Second World War], 2 vols (Ioannina: n.p., 1995). Malakasis Ioannis, The Greek Naval Revolution of April 1944 (Ioannina: University of Ioannina, 2001). Manolas Stamatios, Ἡ δράση τοῦ Πολεμικοῦ καί Ἐμπορικοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ Ναυτικοῦ κατά τόν Β ́ Παγκόσμιον Πόλεμον [The Operations of the Greek Navy and That of the Greek Merchant Marines During the Second World War] (Athens:Pitsilos, 1998).

324

Fotakis

Manousogiannakis Sifis, Το Κυπριακό ναυτικό μέχρι το 1974: Συγκρότηση – Πραξικόπημα – Τουρκική Εισβολή [The Cypriot Navy Until 1974: Constitution-Dictatorship and the Turkish Invasion] (Athens:n.p., 2016). Marinos Themis, Μυστική Αποστολή στο Ιόνιο [Secret Mission in the Ionian Sea] (Athens: Ikaros, 2013). Martzoukos Achilles, Στα Μπουγάζια του Αιγαίου [Through the Straits of the Aegean] (Athens: n.p., 1992). Massouras Timotheos and Thomas Katopodis, Hellenic Submarines, 2 vols (Athens: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2010). Mastrakas Antonios, Αρμενίζοντας στα Πέλαγα των Ναυτικών Αναμνήσεων [Sailing in the Seas of My Naval Reminiscences] (Kifissia: n.p., 2008). Mastrakas Markos, Ιστορία της ΣΝΔ & Συναφών Γεγονότων 1971–2010 [History of the Hellenic Naval Academy, 1971–2010] (Athens: n.p., 2011). Matiatos Dimitrios, Πως χρηματοδοτούνταν οι Δημόσιες Δαπάνες κατά τον Αγώνα του 1821 [Financing the Greek War of Independence] (Athens: n.p. 1990). Mavrideros Dimitrios, Γενεαλογικές ανιχνεύσεις: Το γένος Βούλγαρη της Ύδρας (1658–1996) [Geneological Research: The Voulgaris Family of Hydra 1658–1996] (Athens: n.p., 2018). Mavrideros Dimitrios, Γενεαλογική μνήμη: Το γένος Γκίκα της Ύδρας (1628–1935) [Geneological Memory: The Gikas Family of Hydra 1628–1935] (Athens: n.p., 2014). Mavrideros Dimitrios, Γενεαλογικά σημειώματα: το γένος Οικονόμου της Ύδρας (1668–1949) [Geneological Notes: The Economou Family of Hydra (1668–1949)] (Athens: n.p., 2012). Mentogiannis Vassilis, Kostis Mitsotakis and George Nikolaidis, 52 μέρες 1943: Το αντιτορπιλικό Βασίλισσα Όλγα και η μάχη της Λέρου [52 Days of 1943: The Destroyer Queen Olga and the Battle of Leros] (Athens: Kastaniotis, 2004). Metallinos Constantine, ‘Βασίλισσα Όλγα’ Ένα αντιτορπιλικό στη δίνη του πολέμου [Queen Olga: A Destroyer in the Heat of War] (Piraeus:Hellenic Maritime Museum, 1996). Metallinos Constantine, Ο Ναυτικός Πόλεμος κατά την Ελληνική Επανάσταση 1821–1829 [The Naval War During the Greek War of Independence, 1821–1829], 2 vols (Athens: Andy’s Publishers, 2016). Metaxas Yegor, Σημειώσεις του Υποπλοιάρχου του Ρωσικού Στόλου Γιεγκόρ Μεταξά: Η Ρωσική Ναυτική Μοίρα στα Ιόνια Νησιά 1798–1799 [Notes of the First Lieutenant of the Russian Fleet Giegor Metaxa: The Russian Squadron in the Ionian Islands 1798–1799] (Argostoli: Holy Diocese of Cephalonia, 2016). Mine Warfare Administration, 130 χρόνια Δράσης πλοίων Ναρκοπολέμου, 1880–2010 [130 Years of Greek Naval Units of Mine Warfare] (Salamis: Hellenic Navy, Fleet Headquarters, 2010). Moraites Karolos, Έλλη. Η τορπίλλη της ντροπής: Πως και γιατί οι Ιταλοί χτύπησαν το Δεκαπενταύγουστο του 1940 το Ελλη έξω από το λιμάνι της Τήνου [The Helle. The Torpedo

The Development of Naval History in Greece

325

of Shame: How and Why the Italians Attacked the Helle off the Port of Tinos in mid-August 1940] (Athens: Vasdekis, 1998). Morillo Stephen and Michael Pavkovic, What is Military History? 2nd ed. (Cambridge, UK and Madden, MA: Polity, 2013). Mortaki Sappho et al. (eds), Η ναυτιλία στο μακεδονικό χώρο από την αρχαιότητα μέχρι σήμερα: Πρακτικά Ζ’ Πανελλήνιου Συνεδρίου Ναυτικών Μουσείων. Λιτόχωρο, 19–21 Σεπτεμβρίου 2008: Η συμβολή της λιτοχωρίτικης ναυτιλίας στη διατήρηση της ελληνικότητας της Θεσσαλονίκης-Μακεδονίας στη μετά Οθωμανοκρατίας εποχή [Shipping in Macedonia from Antiquity to the Present: Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the Greek Maritime Museums. Litochoro 19–21 September 2008: The Contribution of the Shipping of Litochoro in the Preservation of Hellenism in Thessaloniki and Macedonia in the Aftermath of the Ottoman Period] (Litochoro: Maritime Museum of Litochoro, 2014). Mouratidis Fotis, Έλληνες Ναύαρχοι & Στρατηγοί του Ρωσικού Πολεμικού Ναυτικού [Greek Admirals and Generals of the Russian Navy] (Athens: Asine, 2017). Mourtzakis Emmanouil, Το Πολεμικό Ναυτικό της ΕΣΣΔ μέσα από τα αρχεία της Αμερικανικής Κεντρικής Υπηρεσίας Πληροφοριών και η σύγχρονη Ρωσική Ναυτική Στρατηγική [The Soviet Navy through the Archives of CIA and the Modern Russian Naval Strategy] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy , 2019). Moyar Mark, ‘The Current State of Military History’, The Historical Journal 50 (2007), 225–240. Hellenic Maritime Museum , Το Θωρηκτό ‘Γεώργιος Αβέρωφ’, 1911–2011. Ιστορία και Τέχνη [The Armoured Cruiser G. Averoff, 1911–2011. History and Art] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2011). Nikolaidis Nikolaos, Ο ναύαρχος Γεώργιος Κακουλίδης: Μακεδονομάχος, επαναστάτης, βουλευτής, γερουσιαστής (1871–1946) [Admiral Georgios Kakoulidis: Fighter for the Union of Macedonia with Greece, Revolutionary, Member of Parliament, Senator, 1871–1946] (Athens: Paraskinio, 2001). Overy Richard, “Introduction” in Sebastian Cox and Peter Gray, Air Power History: Turning Points from Kittyhawk to Kosovo (London: Routledge, 2002), ix–xix. Pagotsis Evangelos, Γιουτλάνδη – 1916: Η μεγαλύτερη ναυμαχία επιφανείας [ Jutland – 1916: The Largest Naval Battle of the Dreadnought Era] (Athens: Epikoinonies, 2002). Pagotsis Evangelos, Η ναυμαχία της Τσουσίμα, 27–28, Μαΐου 1905: Η ανατολή του ιαπωνικού ήλιου [The Battle of Tsushima, May 27–28, 1905: The Rising Sun of Japan] (Athens: Amyntiki Grammi 2006). Paizis-Paradelis Konstantinos, Ηρώων Πεσόντων Πολεμικού Ναυτικού στους Πολέμους 1940–1945 [Naval Heroes That Fell in Battle During the Wars of 1940–1945] (Athens: Historical Service of the Hellenic Navy 1990). Paizis-Paradelis Konstantinos and Nikolaos Damvergis, Ο Σιωπηλός Πόλεμος. Η δράση των Ελληνικών Υποβρυχίων 1940–1944 [The Silent War: The Naval Operations of the Greek Submarines, 1940–1944] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 1995).

326

Fotakis

Paizis-Paradellis Konstantinos, Hellenic Warships, 1829–2001 (Athens: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2002). Paizis-Paradelis Konstantinos et al., Β Παγκόσμιος Πόλεμος, Η δράση του Πολεμικού μας Ναυτικού 1939–1945 [World War II, The Operations of Our Navy, 1939–1945] (Athens: Society for the Study of Greek History, 2003). Paizis-Paradelis Konstantinos, Το τίμημα του πολέμου. Απώλειες και θυσίες της Ελληνικής Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας στον Β Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο [The Price of War: Losses and Sacrifices of the Greek Merchant Marine in the Second World War] (Athens: Societyfor the Study of Greek History, 2004). Paloumbis Ioannis, Βαλκανικοί Πόλεμοι. O Ναυτικός Αγώνας 1912–1913 [The Balkan Wars. the War at Sea 1912–1913], (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2007). Paloumbis Ioannis, From the Seas. to the Skies. The Naval Air Force Chronicle, 1913–1941 (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2009). Paloumbis Ioannis, The Naval War of 1912–1913: 100 Years Since the Strategic Naval Victory of the Balkan Wars (Athens: Hellenic Maritime Museum 2013). Paloubis Ioannis, Ελληνική ναυτική παράδοση [Ten Thousand Years of Hellenic Maritime Tradition] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2014). Paloumbis Ioannis, Οι άνθρωποι του Κινήματος του Ναυτικού. Μάιος 1973 [The Participants in the Naval Coup of May 1973] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2016). Paloubis Ioannis, Ελλήνων Πλόες: Η Πορεία της Ελληνικής Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας δια μέσου των Αιώνων [Seafaring of the Hellenes: The Course of the Hellenic Merchant Marine through the Centuries] (Piraeus: Hellenic Maritime Museum, 2017). Panagiotopoulos Vassilis, Η Αριστερή Ιστοριογραφία για την Ελληνική Επανάσταση [Τhe Leftist Historiography of the Greek War of Independence] in Paschalis Kitromilidis and Triantaphyllos Sklavenitis, Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας, 1833– 1922 [Historiography of Modern and Contemporary Greece, 1833–1922], vol. 1 (Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2004), 567–577. Panos Nikolaos, Στολές του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού: κατά τον Β’ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο 1940–1944 [Greek Naval Uniforms 1940–1944] (Athens: Historical Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2016). Papadimitriou Dimitrios, Ελληνικό Λαϊκό Απελευθερωτικό Ναυτικό, 1943–1945) [Greek People’s Liberation Navy, 1943–1945] (Athens: Amyntiki Grammi, 2007). Papageorgiou Gisis, Uniforms of the Hellenic Navy (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 1998). Papathanasis Elias, Καμικάζι, Ο θεϊκός άνεμος [Kamikaze, The Divine Wind], (Athens: Periskopio, 2006). Paschalidou Eupraxia, Η Διαχρονική Πορεία της Διακλαδικότητας [Interservice Co-operation across History] (Athens: Hellenic Commission of Military History, 2008). Paspatis George, Dead Reckoning: A Memoire of World War II in the Aegean (Athens: Libro, 2009).

The Development of Naval History in Greece

327

Phocas Demetrios, Ο Στόλος του Αιγαίου 1912–1913, Έργα και Ημέραι [The Naval Operations of the Aegean Fleet, 1912–1913] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 1940). Phocas Demetrios, Έκθεσις επί της Δράσεως του Β. Ναυτικού κατά τον Πόλεμον 1940–1944 [Report on the Naval Operations of the Royal Hellenic Navy between 1940 and 1944], vol. 1 (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 1953). Pigadas Nikos, Τορπίλες και συρματοπλέγματα. Έλληνες ναυτικοί αιχμάλωτοι πολέμου [Torpedoes and Barbed Wire: Greek Sailors Prisoners of War] (Athens: Batsioulas, 2010). Pispiriga Fula, Το ημερολόγιον του ‘Κίμωνος’ [The Logship of Kimon] (Athens: Potamos, 2012). Platsoukas Stamatios, Ταξείδια και Πολεμικά Γεγονότα: Αναμνήσεις ενός παλαιού Ναυάρχου 1892–1920 [Naval Cruises and War Events: Reminiscences of a Retired Admiral 1892– 1920] (Athens:History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2019). Polychronidis Ioannis, Ναυτικό Νοσοκομείο Κρήτης 1969–1999: Ιστορικό-φωτογραφικό λεύκωμα για το Ναυτικό Νοσοκομείο Κρήτης και τα στρατιωτικά νοσοκομεία της Κρήτης: (Από την περίοδο του Βυζαντίου μέχρι σήμερα) [Photographic Album of the Naval Hospital of Crete and all Military Hospitals in Crete since the Byzantine Era] (Chania: Naval Hospital of Crete 1999). Potter Elmer and Chester Nimitz, Sea Power: A Naval History (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1960). Prassa Annita and Konstantina Adamopoulou-Pavlou, Ανδρέας Μιαούλης. Από την υπόδουλη ως την ελεύθερη Ελλάδα, 1769–1835 [Andreas Miaoulis: From the Enslaved to Independent Greece, 1769–1835] (Athens: Estia, 2003). Prassa Annita, Οι αγωνίστριες του ‘21: Μπουμπουλίνα, Μαυρογένους, Καΐρη, Βισβίζη [Female Freedom Fighters of the Greek Revolution of 1821: Bouboulina, Mavrogenous, Kairi, Visvizi] (Athens: Periskopio, 2010). Rados Konstantinos, Τα καταδρομικά της ‘Κεντρικής υπέρ των Κρητών Επιτροπής’ εν τω Αγώνι του 1866–1868 [The Naval Operations of the Cruisers of the Central Committee for Crete between 1866 and 1868] (Athens: n.p., 1896). Rodger Nicholas, ‘Review of Fotakis, Greek Naval Strategy and Policy’, Journal of Maritime Research (August 2006). Rodger Nicholas, ‘Considerations on Writing a General Naval History’ in John B. Hattendorf (ed.), Doing Naval History, Essays Toward Improvement (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College, 1995), 117–128. Rodger Nicholas, ‘Britain’ in John Hattendorf (ed.), Ubi Sumus? The State of Naval and Maritime History (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College Press, 1994), 41–57. Roumanis Elias, O τορπιλισμός της Έλλης και το έπος του 1940–1941: Συγκριτική ιστορική μελέτη [The Torpedoing of HNS Helle and the Epic of 1940–1941] (Athens: TINOS, 2002).

328

Fotakis

Rouskas Ioannis, Πόρος Ναύσταθμος και Εκπαιδευτήριο του Πολεμικού Ναυτικού [Poros, Arsenal and Naval School of the Greek Navy] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff, 1989). Roussen Karolos, Περιπολία στο γερμανοκρατούμενο Αιγαίο, Μάρτιος 1944 [Patrol in the German-held Aegean Sea, March 1944] (Athens: n.p., 1993). Sfaktos Eleftherios, Ιστορικό φωτογραφικό λεύκωμα Σχολής Ναυτόπαιδων-ΣΔΥΝ-ΣΜΥΝ, 1946–2000 [Photographic Album of the Hellenic Naval College for Petty Officers, 1946– 2000] (Athens: Hellenic Navy General Staff 2007). Simpsas Marios, Το Ναυτικό στην Ιστορία των Ελλήνων [The Navy in Greek History], 4 vols, 2nd ed. (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2007). Sinou Kira, Erika Athanasiou, Στο σταυροδρόμι της ημισελήνου: Η ναυμαχία της Ναυπάκτου, 7 Οκτωβρίου 1571 [At the Crossroads of the Crescent: The Battle of Lepanto, October 7, 1571] (Athens: Kedros, 2010). Stamelos Dimitris, Ἀνδρέας Μιαούλης: Ἔπος καί τραγωδία [Andreas Miaoulis: Epic and Tragedy] (Athens: Estia, 2003). Stamou Panagiotis, Ο Αξιωματικός Λάμπρος Κατσώνης και ο Ρωσσικός Στολίσκος στη Μεσόγειο [Greek Naval Officer Lampros Katsonis and the Russian Flotilla in the Aegean] (Athens: Papasotiriou, 2011). Stamou Panagiotis, Λάμπρος Κατσώνη: τεκμήρια ιστορίας  – λαογραφίας  – παράδοσης [Lampros Katsonis: Evidence of History, Folklore and Tradition] (Livadia: Chouzoumis Bros, 2012). Stathopoulos Ioannis, Το Κίνημα του Ναυτικού, Μάιος 1973. Προσωπική Μαρτυρία [The Naval Movement, May 1973: Personal Testimony] (Athens: Papazisis, 2003). Stavropoulos Dimitrios et al., Περλ Χάρμπορ: Ο απόλυτος αιφνιδιασμός [Pearl Harbor: The Absolute Surprise Attack] (Athens: Periskopio, 2001). Stavropoulos Dimitrios and Konstantinidis, Αεροπλανοφόρα: Κυρίαρχοι των θαλασσών [Aircraft Carriers: Sovereigns of the Seas] (Athens:11 Aviation Publications, 2007). Stephanadis Adam, Το Ελληνικό Κράτος της Θάλασσας. Η Ιστορία του Σύγχρονου Ελληνικού Πολεμικού Ναυτικού [Greek Seapower: The History of the Modern Greek Navy], 2 vols (Athens: Stephanadis, 2017). Tagalakis Dimitrios, Αναμνήσεις του Ναυτικού Αγώνος: Βαλκανικοί Πόλεμοι, Αιγαίον–Ιόνιον [Memoirs of the Naval Struggle: Balkan Wars, Aegean–Ionian Sea] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 1995). Tassas Konstantinos, Ο τελευταίος ήρωας του θρυλικού αντιτορπιλικού ‘Αδρίας’ L-67 Γιώργος Τασσάς [The Last Hero of the Legendary Destroyer Adrias L-67, Giorgos Tassas] (Athens: Gutenberg, 2019). Tetsuro Sumida Jon and David Alan Rosenberg, ‘Machines, Men, Manufacturing, Management, and Money: The Study of Navies as Complex Organizations and the Transformation of Twentieth-century Naval History’ in John B. Hattendorf (ed.),

The Development of Naval History in Greece

329

Doing Naval History, Essays Toward Improvement (Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College, 1995), 25–39. Thoktaridis Konstantinos and Aris Bilalis, Ανελκύοντας την ιστορία: Η εποποιία της ανέλκυσης ναυαγίων στην μεταπολεμική Ελλάδα [The Epic of the Lifting of Shipwrecks from the Bottom of the Seain Post-war Greece] (Thessaloniki: Kyriakidis, 2017). Thoktaridis Konstantinos and Bilalis, Ναυάγια στον ελληνικό βυθό: Κατάδυση στην ιστορία τους [Shipwrecks in the Bottom of the Greek Seas: A Dive into Their History] (Athens: Aik. Laskaridi Foundation, 2015). Tortorelis Charalambos, ‘Φορείς Ναυτικής Παράδοσης και Θαλασσίου Περιβάλλοντος’ [Foundations of Naval Tradition and Marine Environment], Περίπλους Ναυτικής Ιστορίας 62 (2008), 27–51. Tripontikas Panagiotis and Stefanos Milesis, 1900: Οι περιπέτειες του Παύλου Κουντουριώτη στον πρώτο υπερατλαντικό πλου με το Εύδρομο ‘Ναύαρχος Μιαούλης’ [1900: The Adventures of Pavlos Kountouriotis in the Course of the First Transatlantic Cruise with the Light Cruiser Navarchos Miaoulis] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 2015). Tripontikas Panagiotis, Ναυάγια στις Ελληνικές θάλασσες: 1830–1951. Η υποβρύχια περιουσία των Μ.Τ.Ν. & Ν.Α.Τ. [Shipwrecks in Greek Seas: 1830–1951. The Submarine Property of the Pension Funds for Naval and Merchant Marine Personnel] (Athens: n.p., 2016). Tsaprazis Nikolaos, Ο Πολεμικός Ναύσταθμος Σαλαμίνος [The Naval Arsenal of Salamis] (Athens: History Service of the Hellenic Navy, 1991). Tsikontiris Aris et al. (eds), Πλεούμενα των λιμνών και ποταμών του τόπου μας 18ος–20ος αιώνας: Ένα ταξίδι στον κόσμο των ξύλινων σκαριών των γλυκών/υφάλμυρων νερών και του πολιτισμού μας [Vessels of the Lakes and the Rivers, 18th–20th Centuries: A Voyage in the World of Wooden Vessels] (Athens: Arteon, 2015). Tsikontiris Aris et al. (eds), Πειρατικά και Κουρσάρικα σκαριά των θαλασσών μας, 18ος–19ος αιώνας: Ένα ταξίδι στον κόσμο των πειρατικών και κουρσάρικων σκαριών και στη ζωή των προγόνων μας [Piratical and Corsair Vessels in our Seas, 18th and 19th Century: A Voyage in the World of the Ships of Pirates and Corsairs in the Life of Our Predecessors] (Athens: Arteon, 2016). Valkavanis Panos et al. (eds), Πρακτικά 10ου Πανελλήνιου Συνεδρίου Ναυτικών Μουσείων: Ελληνικές Ναυτικές Πολιτείες, 16ος–19ος αιώνας [Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the Greek Maritime Museums: Greek Maritime Cities 16th–19th Centuries] (Athens: Maritime and Historical Museum of Galaxidi, 2018). Varfis Konstantinos, Τό ελληνικό ναυτικό κατά την Καποδιστριακή περίοδο: Τά χρόνια της προσαρμογής [The Greek Navy During the Capodistria Administration: The Adjustment Era] (Athens: Syllogos pros Diadosin Ofelimon Vivlion, 1994). Varfis Konstantinos, Βενετοτουρκικοί και Ρωσοτουρκικοί πόλεμοι στις ελληνικές θάλασσες: 1453–1821 [Venetian-Turkish and Russian-Turkish Wars in the Greek Seas, 1453–1821] (Athens: Iris, 1995).

330

Fotakis

Veremis Thanos et al., Στρατός και πολιτική [The Army and Politics] (Athens: Sakoulas, 1989). Veremis Thanos, Ο στρατός στην Ελληνική Πολιτική. Από την Ανεξαρτησία στη Δημοκρατία [The Army in Greek Politics: From Independence to Democracy] (Athens: Courier, 2000). Vourliotis Sotirios, Γερμανικό ναυτικό 1936–1945: Οι πειρατές του Γ΄ Ράιχ [German Navy 1936–1945: The Pirates of the Third Reich] (Athens: Periskopio, 2009). Xiradaki Koula, Γυναίκες του ‘21: Προσφορές, ηρωισμοί και θυσίες: Συμβολή στην έρευνα [Women of the Greek Revolution of 1821: Their Contribution, Heroism and Sacrifice: Contribution to Ongoing Research] (Athens: Dodoni, 1995). Yerxa Donald, Recent Themes in Military History: Historians in Conversation (Columbia, SC: The University of South Carolina Press, 2008).

Epilogue

Greek Maritime History or Maritime History of the Greeks? Katerina Galani and Alexandra Papadopoulou In the long run, European economic growth has been inextricably linked with the development of maritime economy and maritime nations. Over the years, this reality has shaped a resonant Western European-centred perception of maritime economic development. Through the examples of renowned maritime nations such as Britain, the Netherlands and France, European maritime history has been interwoven with the history of maritime empires with a colonial outreach. However, this dominant interpretative model of the formation and development of maritime nations is not applicable to other European case studies such as the Norwegians and the Greeks, who followed a different path from the imperial, and yet remain among the leading maritime powers worldwide to the present day. Furthermore, over the last decades, the expansion of the global economy and the integration of Asian players in shipping has further challenged the established historiographical models and calls for non-Eurocentric multidimensional approaches. Japan, Korea, China and India, alongside their recent impressive course in the shipping industry, reinvent or reclaim their maritime identity and past as the wealth of relevant studies in maritime history shows, and offer an alternative pattern of development. This volume presents Greek Maritime History to a wider audience and unravels the historical trajectory of a maritime nation par excellence in the Eastern Mediterranean. At the core of the book lies the rise of the Greek merchant fleet and its transformation from a peripheral to an international carrier. The different chapters revolved around a wide variety of thematic axes – from shipping, fishing and trade to piracy, technology, human resources and entrepreneurship over an extended period of time that spanned from the seventeenth to the twentieth century. This selection of topics reflects the main directions of Greek maritime historiography over the last thirty years of its existence as an independent academic field. Following the evolution of Greek shipping for more than three centuries, the book traces a maritime nation in its making and provides proof of the long-standing relationship of the Greeks with the sea and the latter’s everlasting imprint on Greek society, economy and culture. Alongside the published histories of the traditional maritime nations

© Katerina Galani and Alexandra Papadopoulou, 2022 | doi:10.1163/9789004467729_015

332

Galani and Papadopoulou

of Europe, this collective volume aspires to set out a different, yet successful pattern of maritime economic development. In the early modern period, European Maritime History is the history of maritime empires – that is, the British, the French, the Dutch – and the rise of their national fleets. It is a history of political intervention, expansion, colonisation and competition among fleets placed under the auspices of their sovereigns. The maritime empires built their ascendancy on monopolistic chartered companies that acted as economic and military vehicles of expansion, such as the British East India Company and the Dutch VOC. In the modern era, state intervention was still pronounced in shipping in the form of financial subventions in gigantic liner companies such as the Austrian Lloyd and the Messageries Maritimes, in a combination of the public and private sector. In addition, European Maritime History is the history of the major ports of Europe like Amsterdam, London, Hamburg, Marseille that became cosmopolitan societies and maritime centres early on, with extended infrastructure to accommodate combined services such as shipping, trade, finance, insurance, and so on. The ports were the hubs that connected the ‘highways’ of European traffic and trade. In contrast to the maritime empires of Europe, the rise of Greek shipping offers a new paradigm: Greek Maritime History before 1830 is the history of a stateless maritime nation. From the seventeenth to the eighteenth century, the Greek merchant fleet developed progressively into a key actor in the Eastern Mediterranean in the absence of a Greek polity. Greeks of the Ionian and the Aegean seas were divided between the Venetian and Ottoman empires but shared common entrepreneurial ethics and business practices. Caught among competing states and jurisdictions, they became mediators between the Ottomans and the Western Europeans, crossed borders to carry their trade and forged networks of cooperation that extended all the way to the diasporic communities of Western Europe and the Black Sea. This peculiar political status that nevertheless encouraged the rise of Greek shipping led to the widespread use of the term ‘Greek-owned’ in the Greek historiography; a term that was coined to describe the fleet of the Greeks under all flags in the post-World War II period. In the early modern period the Greek-owned fleet hoisted a number of different and interchanging flags in the Eastern Mediterranean that varied according to the economic and political conjuncture: Ottoman, Venetian, Russian, Ionian, Austrian, Maltese, French and so on. What began as a necessity due to conflicting interests and identities was transformed into an optimal business strategy of flags of convenience in the modern era and assured a preferential fiscal status for the Greek-owned fleet. From the establishment of a fledgling Greek state in the nineteenth century until the present

Epilogue

333

day, state intervention in Greek shipping remains marginal and the sector flourishes across borders and states. In addition, the Greek paradigm up until the first third of the 19th century is not dependent on the large port cities of the Mediterranean (e.g., Constan­ tinople, Smyrna or Alexandria) but on the small echelles and ports that sprang up across the islands and shores of the Aegean and Ionian seas. The plethora of small loading sites and the maritime communities created a powerful transport system towards which ships, capital, cargo and human resources flowed. This unique business organisation resulted in lower transport costs and direct access to production sites and cargoes, while it relied on local trade networks that were not accessible to the European actors operating in the Levant. Furthermore, the history of Greek shipping is a history of continuity and adaptability. At the core of Greek Maritime History lies the maritime community, the nautotopos, which provided the vessels and the crews, the capital and the business know-how and cradled the maritime economy. The chapters of this book relate the continuous interaction with the sea of the Greeks who lived along the coasts and the numerous islands of the Aegean and Ionian seas. These geographically dispersed communities, deprived of resources for their survival, grew dependent on their surrounding environment, forming radiant networks of collaboration and exchange that crossed different jurisdictions and rules (Venetian and Ottoman) across the Eastern Mediterranean basin. Extended research has revealed that this net of economic and social interaction between maritime communities over time was embedded into a wider integrated business system and created a sense of belonging into a unified socio-economic space. In this system, maritime communities did not just operate as pools of capital, specialised labour, maritime practices and knowledge but also preserved and reproduced maritime culture in the long run. This book advocates for the – so far neglected in the maritime historiography – importance of maritime communities as cradles of seamanship, maritime entrepreneurship and culture in Greek, and more broadly in European Maritime History. The growth of Greek shipping over the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries has been based on the transformation of the early transport system: springing from the maritime communities, it developed into an integrated entrepreneurial network of the Greek diaspora merchant houses and the shipping businesses of the Ionian and Aegean seas. Taking advantage of their specialist knowledge of the Levant and their connections to Western European traders, Greek shipowners and merchants of the Ionian and Aegean seas transcended their familiar waters, crossed the Mediterranean and established themselves in the markets of grain production and consumption. This elaborated business system was set in motion by controlling both ends of grain trade as well

334

Galani and Papadopoulou

as providing specialist services. The newly established port cities of the Black Sea, the ports of Constantinople and Alexandria in the East, the Italian and Spanish ports, Marseille and London in the West became hubs of an extended network of Greek diaspora merchant firms. In this system, Greek merchant houses operated as suppliers and sellers of the cargoes that were transported by Greek-owned ships, while they handled the logistics, insurance, financial services and administrative work. Their role was instrumental in the emergence of the Black Sea region as a breadbasket of Europe in the nineteenth century, acting as agents of globalisation for the region, as the case study, in this volume, of the port of Theodosia in southern Russia has demonstrated. Crossing territories, adapting and exploiting different institutional and cultural frameworks has defined the hybrid business identity that Greek shipowners exhibit to this day. The cosmopolitanism and flexibility of the Greek diaspora communities were successfully combined with the strong ‘traditionalism’ of the maritime communities, with close-knit family and kinship ties holding both communities together. The case of the Sifneos family is a prime example of this dual maritime identity of Greek entrepreneurs, while the Ralli Bros are indicative of the successful adaptation of diaspora merchant houses to the British context and its global transition. This ‘glocal’ business culture, both local and global at the same time, was evident in Greek shipping until the twentieth century. A leading Greek tycoon, who might have been brought up in London or New York with his business and fleet scattered around the globe, will most likely return to his island of origin to ‘marry or bury’. Last, but not least, Greek shipping developed early on as a specialised industry that differed from the liner companies of European shipping. Since the eighteenth century, Greek shipping emerged as a peripheral fleet, taking advantage of the escalation of economic and political competition over the dominance in international trade between the British and the French and the outbreak of the Industrial Revolution. The rising international demand in foodstuffs and raw materials provided an incentive for Greek shipowners to engage in the emerging trade of bulk commodities linking the Black Sea with the Western markets. These developments, in combination with the lack of state protection and support, defined the structure and type of the Greek merchant fleet. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Greek fleet comprised a large number of small- and medium-sized sailing vessels designed to serve the short-haul routes of the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea and the European Atlantic. The introduction of steamship navigation to the intra-Mediterranean traffic, which was dominated by the European liner companies, exerted pressure on the Greek shipping industry, which relied almost exclusively on private funds

Epilogue

335

and received limited state support. It is no coincidence that the Greek-owned fleet was a latecomer to steam navigation, which was capital-intensive: Greek sailing ships were effectively replaced by steamers at the turn of the nineteenth century. Though systematic efforts were made to establish a Greek liner company, as is shown by the case of the Hellenic Steam Navigation Company, Greek shipping remained predominantly a tramp fleet for bulk commodities, opting for a more flexible and potentially more profitable service. A new group of shipowners that relied on the diasporic capital and business networks emerged in the twentieth century and managed to make a successful transition to steam. Based in their majority outside the miniscule Greek kingdom, these commercial houses became international players. The specialist knowledge that was accumulated through their engagement in the grain trade was going to be endowed with new bulk commodities – especially oil – by the middle of the twentieth century. The sea transport of oil lies in the heart of modern Greek shipping, while Greek shipowners hold the largest tanker fleet worldwide. Modernisation and technological innovation impacted on the traditional maritime communities, which relied for centuries on the economy of sail. As the example of Kalymnos and sponge fishing revealed, along with the transformation of the shipping sector and maritime trade, industrialisation transformed, in practice, people and their communities. Long-established social and economic structures were subverted, affecting the lives and works of people. However, this case is also indicative of the ability of these communities to survive by reinventing their relation with the sea, as their main source of income. Continuity and adaptability is still demonstrated in Greek Maritime History. The transition from shipping and trade to migration, fishing and eventually tourism reveals an interesting historical trajectory of the Greek maritime communities that requires further research and analysis.

Index of Terms and Institutions American Declaration of Independence  79 Amphitrite I (database) 16, 19, 28, 33, 44, 45, 72 Amphitrite II (database) 19 Argo (database) 18, 22, 23, 46, 128 Argonauts (database) 18, 22, 23, 46, 128 Association of Scottish Shipbuilders 206 Atlantic Canada Shipping Project 3, 129 Atlantic economy 130 Austrian Lloyd 16, 44, 194–196, 199, 204, 212, 219, 332 Balkan Wars 27, 298, 305, 307 Baltic Exchange 172 National Bank of Greece 26, 192–195, 217 beratli(s) 88, 89. See also berat(s) berat(s) 88, 89, 92 Black Sea Historical Statistics (database)  5, 18, 22, 23, 46, 124, 126, 128, 129, 131, 132, 136, 139, 140, 141, 144, 145 BSHS. See Black Sea Historical Statistics Blackwood & Gordon 201, 219, 220 Booker Line (shipping company) 263 Booker McConnell 263 British Customs Bills of Entry 20, 45 British East India Company 332 Brotherhood of St Nicholas 56, 57 Builders Old Measurement 137 business group(s) 6, 20, 34, 35, 80, 97, 256–259, 261, 263, 271, 272 capitulation(s) 64, 71, 88, 90, 95 caviar (commodity) 143, 187 Centre of Maritime History 2, 12, 40–42. See also Institute of Mediterranean Studies (IMS) Centro de Estudios Migratorios Latinoamericanos 18, 24 Charles Lungley and Co 204 China Navigation Company 264 Church of St George 65 Cia de Nav. Centrale 267 cluster(s) 27, 35, 36, 80, 277

Clyde Shipbuilding and Engineering Co  201 Cold War 294 Collegio of Venice 57 Compañía Trasmediterránea 212, 227 Constantinople Conference 137 Continental Blockade 81 Correr Museum 65 corsair(s) 4, 19, 105, 108, 110, 111, 115, 117, 118 Council of Ferrara-Florence 55, 67 Cretan Revolution 207, 211, 213 Cretan Shipping Co 211 Crimean War 140, 155, 158, 159 Cunard (company) 199 Cunard Line 203 diaspora Greek 3, 5, 6, 11–15, 17, 21, 30–33, 36, 94, 98, 150–153, 186, 193, 194, 244, 257–259, 261, 264, 273, 333, 334 Jewish 257 German 257 Scottish 257 Dievo (database) 17, 20, 34, 45 diversification 6, 62, 188, 256–258, 260, 261–263, 271–273 diving helmet 233, 234, 237–247, 249, 250 Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople 56 Elders of Kalymnos 233, 246, 247 entrepreneurship theory 279 Eolos SA 187 Ep. Charilaos SA 187 European Commission of the Danube 134, 144 family business 5, 6, 35, 180, 183, 186, 188, 258, 261, 280, 281, 290 family firm. See family business family-owned company. See family business First World War 125, 127, 158, 187, 259, 260, 262, 300, 301, 306, 309 Fletcher, Son and Fearnall 206

338 Forges et Chantiers de la Mediterranee 207 Fossick & Hackworth 205 Foundation of Research and Technology Hellas (FORTH) 12, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47. See also Institute of Mediterranean Studies (IMS) French Revolution 79 Gazzetta degli Stati Uniti delle Isole Jonie (periodical) 20 Gazzette Jonica (periodical). See Gazzetta degli Stati Uniti delle Isole Jonie (periodical) global shipping 1, 13, 28 globalization 3, 41, 126 Golden Fleece (database) 18, 22, 23, 46, 128 Goudis (company) 207, 214 grain (commodity) 140–142, 144, 145, 185–188, 259, 333 grain trade 5, 22, 23, 32, 124, 128, 130, 133, 134, 141, 142, 145, 150, 153, 154, 156, 158–162, 164–175, 183, 185–188, 333, 335 Greco-Turkish War of 1922 14 Greek and Oriental Steamship Company 205 Greek constitution 79 Greek Ministry of Defense 294, 296, 304, 311 Greek War of Independence 6, 19, 79, 150, 299, 302, 308, 309, 311 Greek shipping 1–6, 11, 13, 15, 19, 21, 24, 25, 28, 29, 32, 38, 44, 45, 56, 59, 61, 64, 65, 67, 68, 80, 81, 94, 97, 150, 151, 276–283, 285, 286, 288, 290, 304, 331–335 Greek-owned shipping. See Greek shipping  Guildhall Archives 258 Gustav Durante Company 170 Harrison & Crosfield (company) 262 Hellenic Commission on Military History 296 Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive  304 Hellenic Maritime Museum of Piraeus 304, 306 Hellenic Mirror (newspaper) 118 Hellenic National Archives 304 Hellenic National Defence General Staff  296

Index of Terms and institutions Hellenic Naval Academy 296, 297, 299–301, 303 Hellenic Naval War College 300 Hellenic Navy General Staff 296, 298, 299 Hellenic School for Petty Naval Officers 300 Hellenic Steam Navigation Company 5, 191, 211, 219, 223–226, 335 Henderson, Coulborn and Co 202 human resources 6, 25, 36, 60, 77, 81, 183, 188, 276–279, 283, 284, 288–290, 331, 333 Ifestion (database) 16, 19, 26, 45 Indo-China Steam Navigation Company  264 Institute of Mediterranean Studies (IMS)  2, 12, 40, 41, 42, 45, 47. See also Foundation of Research and Technology Hellas (FORTH) Institution of Scottish Engineers 206 International Commission of Military History (ICMH) 296 International Journal of Maritime History (journal) 2, 9, 40 Italian War of 1859 212 J & G Thomson (company) 202, 219, 220 James Finlay & Co 261, 262 James Henderson and Son 202 Jardine Matheson. See Jardine Matheson & Co Jardine Matheson & Co 261, 262, 263 Jason (database) 18, 22, 23, 46, 128 John Brown & Co Ltd 203 John MacDowall and Barbour (company)  211, 224 John Reid & Co 202, 203, 219 John Swire & Son 261, 262 Karaite 170, 172 Kaymakam 233, 245, 247 Kaymakamia 241, 248 Korean War 268 La Marítima, Compañía Mahonesa de Vapores 212, 227 Latin Monetary Union 138 Levant Company 4, 79, 85, 90–94, 96

Index of Terms and institutions Lily C. Michalos 267 Little England (novel) 8 Lloyds Register of Shipping 208 Lobnitz, Coulborn and Co 202 Louis Dreyfus and Co 170 M. Spartalis and Co 205 Margitsa (database) 17, 20, 34, 45 maritime communities 2, 3, 13, 15, 17, 20, 28, 29, 32–37, 43, 47, 77, 81, 232, 333–335 maritime culture 37, 43, 333 maritime entrepreneurship 14, 29, 34, 35, 59, 69, 277, 280, 290, 333 maritime labour 24, 36, 41, 43, 218, 232 maritime nation 26, 137, 279, 282, 331, 332 maritime region 3, 5, 13, 29, 33–40, 145, 181, 184 Maritime Shipping and Trading Co (MSTC)  258, 264–273 Maudslay, Sons & Field 206 Medea (database) 18, 22, 23, 24, 46, 128 Mediterranean Maritime History Network  52 Memorial University of Newfoundland 1 mercantilism 53, 54, 79, 81, 97 merchant house(s) 12, 32, 81, 169–172, 185, 235, 236, 256–264, 272, 333, 334 merchant(s) of Europe 96 Messageries Maritimes 195, 196, 199, 332 Michalinos & Co Ltd 256, 264, 265, 267, 271, 273 Millwall Ironworks and Shipbuilding Co  204 Ministry of Defence 7, 294, 296, 304, 311, 315 Monopolies 4, 53, 54, 79, 85, 90–94, 186, 332 Napoleonic Wars 81, 83, 85, 91 National Bank of Greece 192–195, 217 national pension fund 285, 287, 288 nautotopos, see maritime community  Naval Arsenal of Poros 194 naval history 2, 6, 7, 294–297, 300, 301, 303, 304, 306–308, 310, 311, 313–315. See also new naval history Naval History Research Laboratory 301 Navigocorpus 4 Navy History Service 296–300 nazione 56

339 network(s) business 2, 3, 4, 11–13, 19–21, 30–32, 36, 37, 62, 64, 70, 76–78, 80, 82, 85, 87, 89, 91, 92, 94, 97, 98, 111, 145, 151, 172, 181, 184, 186, 189, 196, 197, 217, 257–261, 265, 273, 277, 332–335 entrepreneurial. See business family 188, 272 transport 5, 159, 160, 162, 163, 166, 170 Neufeld and Co 170, 175 New Hellenic Steam Navigation Company 211, 223–226 new military history 301, 310 Odysseas (database) 17, 20, 34, 45 oil (commodity) 30, 128, 141, 143, 145, 335 Order of St John of Malta 55 Orders in Council 81 Overend, Gurney & Company 205 Pacific Steam Navigation Company 198 Palm Line and Guinea Gulf Line 263 Panhellenic Steam Navigation Company  207, 211 Papayannis & Mousabinis (company) 197 Peninsular and Oriental Company 198 Persian Shipping Services 267 Pile, Spence and Co 205, 219 pirate(s) 55, 66, 84, 105, 106, 108, 110, 111, 113–115, 117, 118 Pontoporeia I (database) 15, 16, 19, 25, 28, 44 Pontoporeia II (database) 15, 16, 19, 25, 28, 44 Poros Naval Arsenal 206 port cities, see ports ports 3, 5, 13–15, 19–23, 30–32, 37, 38, 43, 45–46, 68, 78, 83, 85, 91, 92, 94, 124, 125, 127, 128, 132–135, 140, 142–146, 150, 152–167, 169–173, 182–184, 196, 212–214, 216, 332–334 portofranco 158, 159 Poseidon (database) 15, 17, 19, 20, 31, 45 production system 32, 36 Ralli Bros Ltd 256, 266 resource-based view 277–279, 283, 284, 290 Review of Maritime Transport 25 Rostand (company) 195

340 Royal Mail Steam Packet Co 200 Russian Revolution 156, 187 Russian Steam Navigation and Trading Company 164 Russian-Turkish wars 150 Salname (periodical publication) 133 SeaLiT–FastCat (database) 18, 24, 36, 46, 47 Semaphore de Marseille 20, 44, 45 Sephardic Jews 64 Septinsular Republic 4, 34, 69, 84, 95 Seven-Year War 84 shipbuilding 6, 12, 20, 27, 34, 60, 157, 191–193, 196, 197, 201, 203, 206, 207, 217, 314 shipping business 4, 13, 21, 27–30, 32, 35–37, 43, 52–54, 57, 59–62, 64, 71, 72, 186, 187, 197, 205, 264, 279, 281, 283, 284, 289, 290, 333 shipping enterprise. See shipping business shipping firm. See shipping business shipping income 26, 27 Sifneo Frères 186, 187, 188 skafandro (diving method) 6, 232, 248, 250, 251 skandali (sponge diving method) 236, 250 skandalopetra (sponge diving method). See skandali skin diving (sponge diving method) 236, 241, 242, 243 slave(s) 105–108 Societe de Navigation a Vapeur Grecque et pour la Canalisation du Detroit de l’ Eubee (company) 194

Index of Terms and institutions Sound Toll Registers 4 Spanish Civil War 212 sponge diving 232–252 sponge fishing. See sponge diving sponge-machine (diving method) 237 Stato da Mar. See also Venetian Empire 61 strategic management theory 277 Suez Canal crisis 268 Tanzimat 95, 97 thalassology 2, 9 Thomas Royden & Sons 207, 220 Times, The (newspaper) 258 trading house(s). See merchant house(s) transport system 2, 13, 37–40, 77, 127, 144, 154, 155, 159, 173, 333 Treaty of Adrianople 150 Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca 125 Treaty of Passarowitz 67, 68 Tubino Bros and Co 170. See also Tubino United Merchants Shipping 267 Vagliano Bros 22, 30, 185. See also Vagliano Venetian Republic 4, 69, 84 VOC (Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie)  332 W. J. Tatem 264 Wars of the Austrian Succession 84 West Hartlepool Rolling Mills Co 205 William Pile and Co 201 World War II 14, 19, 25, 27, 30, 32, 196, 260, 263, 287, 305–307, 309, 332

Index of Names Ali Pasha 116 Amalia (Queen of Greece) 210 Antoniades, Emmanuel 118 Armakolas, Stefanakis 117 Avierino (family) 172 Barbarossa 116 Barney, Jay B. 285 Barzanskii, S. 170 Beloousova, Lilia 152 Bilalis, Aris 303 Braudel, Fernand 77, 111, 180, 181 Broeze, Frank 37 Campbell, Robert 237 Catherine, the Great 156, 157, 158, 184 Catherine II, see Catherine, the Great Charatsis, Stylianos 298, 305 Cunning, Stratford 236 Daloumis, Elias 305 Damvergis, Nikolaos 305 Dazara, Geronymos 114 Delis, Apostolos 5, 34, 41, 45, 47 Demestichas, Grigoris 297 Dimitrakopoulos, Anastasios (Admiral) 298, 299, 306 Dimitriadis, Konstantinos 297 Dimitropoulos, Dimitris 4 Dreyfus (family) 171 Economou (family) 299 Elder, John 198 Finlay, James 262 Fischer, Skip 1, 40 Flegel, Charles 240, 248, 249 Fokas, Spyridon 151 Follin, R. 134 Fotakis, Zisis 7, 301, 306 Frangiadis, Stefanos 197 Fusaro, Maria 62 Galani, Katerina 4, 45 Gerontas, Panagiotis 297

Giannarakos, Leonidas 306 Gikas (naval family) 299 Gluzman, Renard 54, 61, 62, 66 Graham (family) 262 Greaves, Alan 181 Greene, Molly 55, 59, 66, 67 Harlaftis, Gelina 2, 4, 44–46, 58, 59, 67, 77, 125, 151, 184, 281, 287 Harvey, Mose Lofley 133, 139 Hatzigrigorakis, G. 211 Herlihy, Patricia 151 Hilmi Bey 247 Hobsbawm, Eric 43 Holt, John 263 Horden, Peregrine 38, 77 Howden, James 198 Ioannidou, Emilio 297 Ionidis, A. 197 Jackson, Gordon 157 Jackson, Ralph Ward 205 Jones, Geoffrey 256 Kalafatas, Metrophanes 248 Kalavros, Nikolaos 247 Kapetanakis, Panayotis 35, 45 Kaplanoglou, George 233 Karamanlis, Konstantinos (Prime Minister of Greece) 28 Karavokiros, Miltiadis 247 Kardasis, Vassilis 150 Katopodis, Thomas 305 Katsonis, Lambros [Lampros] 117, 303 Kennedy, Paul 306 Kerr, Niven 236 King, Charles 180 Kontogeorgis, Dimitrios 151 Koundouriotis, Pavlos (Admiral) 298 Krym 170, 175 Lachanos, Nikolaos (Commodore) 307 Lai, Cheng-Chung 181 Lane, Frederic 62

342 Lawrie, J. G. 206, 219 Leconte, Casimir 25 Leontaritis, G. 59 Lismanis, Dimitrios (Vice Admiral) 299 Lobnitz, Henry C. 202 Loukas, Ioannis 300, 301 Lungley, Charles 204 Macri (family) 94 Maddison, Angus 129 Mahir Bey 233 Maurocordati (family) 94 Mavrideros, Dimitrios 299 Mavrocordatos, Skarlatos M. 197 Mavroyannis, Spyros 197 Metallinos, Constantine (Admiral) 302, 305 Metaxas, Antonios 56 Metaxas, B. 279 Michalinos, Zorzis 265 Milesis, Stephanos 302 Miller, Michael 77 Morozan, Vladimir 152 Napier, Robert 203 Negreponte (family) 94 Novikova, Svitlana 152 Olympitou, Evdokia 5, 6 Onassis, Aristotle 15, 30 Otho (King of Greece) 207, 210, 218 Özveren, Eyüp 181 Pagratis, Gerassimos 4, 33, 62, 95 Paizis-Paradelis, Konstantinos 305 Paloubis, Ioannis (Vice Admiral) 305, 306 Pamuk, Sevket 133, 139 Papadopoulos Vretos, Andreas 118 Papadopoulou, Alexandra 5, 23, 34, 45 Papudoff (family) 172 Peter, the Great 156 Peteraf, Margaret A. 285 Petmezas, Socrates 5, 23 Petrocochini (family) 94 Pile, John 205 Pile, William 201, 205 Placide de Reims (capuchin monk) 109 Platsoukas, Stamatios (Admiral) 298 Purcell, Nicholas 38, 77

Index of Names Ralli  Pandias 273 Stephen 273 Strati 265, 267 family 94, 172, 259, 268. See also Ralli Bros Ltd Randolph, Charles 198 Reid, John 203 Rodocanachi (family) 172 Sarell, James 93 Scaramangas (family) 94, 172 Schinas (family) 94 Selim III (Sultan) 95 Seviros, Gavriil (bishop of Philadelphia) 57 Shliakhov, Oleksiy 152 Sifnaiou/Sifneos (family) 172, 334 Sifneos, Evrydiki 5, 45, 151, 152 Smulian 170 Spence, Joseph 205 Spetzieris, Iacovos 56, 63 Stamatiadis, Anakreon 239 Stavros, Georgios 194 Svendsen, S. 279 Sydorenko, Anna 5 Tachmindjis, G.A. 265 Tavlarios, Heppocrates 245, 249 Theodosiou (Rear Admiral) 303 Theotokas, Ioannis 6, 19, 44, 281, 284 Thoktaridis, Konstantinos (Thoctaridis) 303 Tobazis, Georgios 206 Tositsas, Michail 194 Tripontikas, Panagiotis 302 Tsaprazis, Nikolaos 298 Tsouderos, Emmanuel 25 Tubino  Cesar 170 Regolo 170 Tito 170 Tucci, Ugo 57 Tziros, G.K. 197 Vagliano  Maris 185, 186 Michael 186 See also Vagliano Bros

343

Index of Names Varfis, Konstantinos 300 Venizelos, Eleftherios 187, 299 Vlastos, Jack 265, 270, 273 Volanakis, Konstantinos 204, 206 Voulgaris (family) 299 Vourkatioti, Katerina 6 Wolfson, Isaac 258, 260, 261, 264, 265, 271 Wood, John 203 Wright, Patrick M. 285

Xenos, Stefanos 205 Zakharov, Victor 152 Zervos, John 250 Zizinias, St. 197

Index of Places Aegean islands 4, 32, 65, 92, 105, 109, 182, 235 Africa 44, 55, 260, 263, 266 African Regencies 84 Alexandria 12, 38, 68, 194, 333, 334 Amsterdam 12, 16, 45, 68, 69, 89, 90, 93, 96, 332 Ancona 69 Andros 8, 113 Argolic Gulf 214 Asia Minor 81, 182, 187, 207, 252 Athens 12, 45, 286, 296 Austria 15, 58, 68, 69, 142, 297

Corfu 20, 33, 45, 54, 56, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66, 68, 72, 207, 212, 214, 216 Corinth 213, 214, 216 Corinth, Gulf of 213, 216 Constanța 127, 134, 143 Crete 2, 12, 41, 42, 45, 46, 70, 72, 116, 204, 211–214, 216, 217, 245 Crimea 5, 127, 140, 150, 154–156, 158–162, 164, 167, 168, 170, 171, 173 Crimean Peninsula. See Crimea Cyclades 8, 106, 113–115, 140, 212, 215, 216 Cyprus 14, 57, 92, 245

Balkans 14, 79, 214, 252 Bar 214 Barbaria. See Barbary Barbary 69, 84 Barbary Regencies 68. See also Barbary, African Regencies Barcelona 37 Batumi 128 Belgium 138, 142 Berdyansk 46, 127, 132, 143, 156, 157 Berlin 170, 294 Bordeaux 82 Boston 248 Braila 12, 46, 127, 134, 143, 144, 151 Brindisi 214 Buenos Aires 24 Bug (River) 181 Bulgaria 15, 18, 23, 46, 79, 131, 133, 136, 138, 141, 142, 143 Burgas 46, 127, 133, 143, 211 Byzantium 57

Dalmatia 58, 68, 114 Danube 94, 127, 134, 140, 142, 144–146, 151 Dardanelles 93, 303 Denmark 142 Dindira 266 Dobrogea 127 Dodecanese 14, 248

Cardiff 264 Cephalonia 20, 34, 35, 45, 55, 66, 68, 94, 185, 214 Chios 94, 105, 107, 259, 303 City of London 21, 22, 45, 90, 94, 257 Clyde 198, 201–204, 208 Constantinople 12, 17, 21, 31, 38, 45, 56, 93–95, 204, 212, 214, 216, 217, 236, 245, 247, 259, 333, 334. See also Istanbul

Ekaterinoslav 166 Empire Austro-Hungarian 11 British 6, 79, 257, 261 Ottoman 4, 11, 54, 57, 63, 71, 78, 79, 83, 85–92, 96, 98, 105, 106, 116, 131, 133, 141–143, 150, 182, 186, 212–214, 216, 217, 233, 241, 332 Russian 11, 12, 21, 43, 128, 138–143, 152, 156–161, 163, 171, 183, 211 Venetian 11 England 8, 17, 21, 22, 46, 54, 61, 62, 64, 69, 96, 137, 236 Epirus 68, 116, 214 Etoliko 55, 57, 68 Euboea, Gulf of 214, 216 Europe 3, 11–14, 21, 28–33, 36, 53, 67, 77, 82, 87–90, 94, 96, 97, 108, 118, 130, 131, 138, 140, 142, 157–159, 167, 168, 170, 172, 236, 257, 260, 301, 331, 332, 334 Euxeinos Pontos 181 Evpatoria 127, 132, 143, 154, 156, 158, 159

345

Index of Places Far East 261 Finland 138 Florence 68 Florida 235 France 15, 44, 64, 137, 138, 142, 168, 207, 209, 236, 259, 295, 331

Kerch 46, 128, 132, 143, 156, 164, 181 Kherson 46, 127, 156 Kimolos 114 Koroni 55, 64 Kuban 128, 140 Kythira 66

Galatz (Galați) 46, 127, 134, 143, 144 Galaxidi 20 Genoa, see Genova Genova 12, 45, 63, 68, 84, 170 Germany 25, 142 Gibraltar 76, 85, 168, 206 Glasgow 198, 201–203, 206, 219, 220, 225–227 Govan (district of Glasgow) 203 Greece 2, 4–8, 10–15, 25–28, 30, 34, 35, 40, 44–46, 78, 81, 92, 136, 138, 140, 142, 181, 186, 187, 191–195, 197, 206–209, 212–215, 217, 218, 235, 248, 282, 285, 286, 290, 294–297, 299, 301, 303, 304, 306–308, 310, 311, 313–315, 335 Greek kingdom, see Greece

La Seyne 207, 220 Latin America 81, 85 Laurio 211 Lefkada 65, 72 Lemnos 301 Lesvos 187, 286 Levante. See Eastern Mediterranean Libya 235 Lisbon 68 Litochoro 303 Liverpool 197, 203, 207, 220, 225 Livorno 12, 45, 82–84, 89 London 12, 17, 20–22, 31, 32, 45, 68, 69, 91, 93, 94, 96, 172, 185, 196, 207, 219, 256–260, 264, 267, 273, 283, 332, 334 Lower Danube. See Danube 

Hamburg 68, 69, 170, 332 Hanseatic cities 142 Hydra 45, 117

Magdalen Islands 267 Magut 266 Maliakos Gulf 212, 216 Malta 14, 15, 44, 52, 55, 66, 68, 69, 84, 91, 93, 94, 111, 206 Mariupol 46, 127, 132, 143, 156, 157, 187 Marseille 12, 20, 31, 45, 68, 89, 169, 170, 185, 332, 334 Messina 44, 68 Messolonghi 42, 55, 57, 68 Methoni 55, 64 Middle East 261, 270 Miletus 182 Milos 113, 117 Moldavia 14, 46, 140, 141, 142 Monemvasia 64 Montenegro 79, 214 Morea. See Peloponnese Mykonos 105–108, 113, 114 Mytilene 56, 63, 65

Imbros 211 India 43, 81, 259, 260, 261, 263, 331 Ioannina 116 Ionian Islands 14, 17, 20, 21, 33, 34, 35, 45, 57, 68–71, 79, 84, 86, 91, 95, 140, 142, 150, 182, 185, 206, 207, 212–214, 216, 232 Iran 261 Iraq 261 Istanbul 21, 44, 46, 68, 70, 128, 183, 186, 187, 202. See also Constantinople Italy 14, 15, 44, 46, 138, 142, 168, 209 Ithaca 34, 55, 303 Japan 25, 260, 331 Kalamaki 216 Kalymnos 233–238, 241, 243, 245–251, 303, 335 Kavala 303 Kenya 263

Nafpaktos 57 Nafplio 64, 117, 202, 214 Naples 44, 63, 170

346 Naxos 111 Netherlands 15, 64, 142, 168, 331 New York 32, 334 Nikolayev 46, 127, 132, 135, 156, 170 Norway 1, 46, 140, 142 Novorossiysk 46, 128, 143, 156, 186 ocean  Atlantic 2, 3, 29, 43, 69, 76, 81, 82, 143, 187, 195, 198, 334 Indian 2, 43, 76 Odessa 12, 18, 24, 37, 45, 46, 127, 128, 132, 135, 143, 151, 152, 156, 157, 160, 170, 172, 175, 181–183 Olbia 181 Pagasetic Gulf 211 Paisley 201 Pakistan 58, 263, 266 Panticapaeum 181 Papal state(s) 140, 142 Paris 12, 32 Paros 113, 114 Patmos 65 Patra. See Patras Patras 55, 194, 195, 214 Peloponnese 55, 68, 70, 117, 140, 212, 214, 216 Perama 303 Persia 96, 259 Piraeus 12, 27, 186, 187, 191, 192, 195, 196, 211, 214, 216, 218, 267, 283, 297, 304, 306 Podolia 160 Preveza 214 Prussia 142 Puglia 64 Ragusa 63 Renfrew 202 Rhodes 65, 237 Romania 14, 15, 46, 79, 131, 138–143, 145 Rostov-on-Don 21, 45, 46, 128, 132, 143, 156, 157, 172, 184, 186, 187 Rotterdam 169, 170 Russia 15, 46, 58, 68, 69, 113, 138–140, 150, 156, 158, 159, 170, 171, 182, 186, 187, 244, 249, 259, 308 South 11, 21, 22, 31, 150–152, 154–159, 161, 167, 171, 172, 186–188, 334

Index of Places Salonica 38, 187, 204, 207, 212, 214, 217, 224 Samos 239, 245, 286 Samsun 46, 128, 133, 143, 144 Santorini 113 Sardinia 142 Sea Adriatic 66, 69, 81, 195 Azov 3, 5, 21, 45, 127, 141–143, 152, 153, 158, 160, 180–184, 186, 187–189 Baltic 3, 29, 142, 143, 160 Black 2, 3, 5, 10–24, 28–32, 36, 37, 39, 41, 43, 46, 57, 68, 70, 76, 81, 94–96, 124–134, 138–145, 150–156, 158, 160, 167, 170, 172, 173, 180–183, 185, 187, 188, 306, 332, 334 Caspian 143 Mediterranean 3, 4, 10, 12, 13, 15–19, 28–38, 40, 41, 43, 53, 59, 67, 68, 70, 76–86, 91, 94, 97, 111, 156, 157, 172, 180, 181, 183, 184, 187, 188, 195, 199, 209, 233, 248, 249, 301, 305, 307, 333, 334 Eastern 2, 3, 11–15, 20, 22, 24, 27, 30, 34, 36, 38, 39, 43, 53–56, 58, 61, 63, 67, 69, 71, 78, 87, 89, 90, 92, 97, 98, 140, 152, 167, 189, 195, 209, 235, 258, 259, 273, 331–333 Western 11, 12, 32, 38, 69, 152, 184 North 3, 195 Sebastopol 46, 127 Serbia 79, 138 Sheffield 203 Sicily 66, 91, 142 Skyros 65 Smyrna 12, 38, 82, 89, 207, 213, 214, 217, 333 South Africa 263, 266 Southeast Asia 256, 260 Spain 15, 63, 69, 138, 142, 267 Spetses 17, 20, 21, 34, 45, 210 Sporades 237 St Lawrence, Gulf of 267 St Petersburg 12, 152, 157 Sudan 263 Sunderland 201, 219 Sweden 142 Switzerland 32, 138, 169 Symi 241, 246, 248, 303 Syria 92, 235, 261 Syros 17, 20, 27, 34, 45, 109, 110, 115, 191–196, 206, 207, 210, 211, 214, 215, 217, 218

347

Index of Places Taganrog 5, 12, 21, 45, 46, 127, 128, 132, 135, 143, 151, 156, 157, 160, 172, 182–187 Tanais 181 Tavrida 166 Thames 201, 204, 207 Theodosia 5, 46, 127, 132, 143, 150, 154–156, 158, 159, 161–175, 334 Thermaikos, Gulf of 214 Thessaloniki, see Salonica Thessaly 46, 140, 213 Tinos 68, 110, 113 Trabzon 46, 128, 133, 143, 144 Trieste 12, 44, 45, 68, 69, 89, 117, 204, 212, 236 Tunisia 235 Turkey 14, 15, 46, 96, 142, 212, 216, 261 Tuscany 142 Uganda 263 UK. See United Kingdom

Ukraine 15, 21, 46, 140 United Kingdom 15, 44, 130, 141, 145, 194–202, 204, 205, 218, 264 United States 14, 15, 25, 46, 130, 259, 260, 313 Varna 46, 127, 133, 143 Venice 33, 44, 52–55, 57–65, 67–69, 71, 72, 78, 79 Volos 212, 213, 214, 216 Wallachia 14, 141, 142 Wear 201 West Hartlepool 205, 206, 219 White Sea 142, 143 Yeisk 187 Zakynthos. See Zante Zante 54, 62, 64, 72, 94, 214 Zohar 242