Glen O’Hara talk on ‘The Fight against Seaborne, Oil and Beach Pollution in Post-War Britain’, 19th May

Glen O’Hara, author of Britain and the Sea since 1600 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), is coming to Greenwich on talk about ‘The Fight against Seaborne, Oil and Beach Pollution in Post-War Britain’.

Date: Thursday 19 May 2016 at 6.00 pm.

Venue: University of Greenwich, Room QA 075 (Edinburgh Room), Queen Anne Court Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, London SE10 9LS.

The talk is free – you can register at Eventbrite or just turn up.

‘The Fight against Seaborne, Oil and Beach Pollution in Post-War Britain:

Pollution was not a high priority in the first years after the Second World War. Britain’s coastline and estuaries were often littered with wartime detritus: many inshore and inland waters were highly polluted or indeed toxic and lifeless. Biodiversity and levels of marine life had both fallen rapidly in many areas. A mix of austerity and localism meant that concerted action was almost impossible. But the damage done by the east coast floods of 1953, pressure exerted by increasingly-popular pressure groups pushing for better access to safer amenities, and the shock of oil disasters such as the wreck of the Torrey Canyon in 1967, helped created a new, integrated and urgent sense of ‘the environment’. This involved both accounting for and addressing the manifold dangers of Britain’s polluted seas, and began the long centrally-directed cleanup that continues into the twenty-first century.

 

OilShells

Photo: Oil covered shells,  International Maritime Organization ©. Reproduced from Flickr under a Creative Commons Licence .

Glen O’Hara is Professor of Modern and Contemporary History at Oxford Brookes University. He is the author of Britain and the Sea since 1600 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010). For further information about Glen, please go to http://www.social-sciences.brookes.ac.uk/People/Academic/prof.asp?ID=600. Follow him on Twitter @gsoh31

This talk is part of the History & Environment series presented by the Raphael Samuel History Centre in conjunction with the University of Greenwich, Dept of History, Politics and Social Sciences. This year’s series theme is Britain and the Sea. To find out more about the RSHC History and Environment Seminars in general, please contact George Yerby george.yerby@googlemail.com. For more information on these Greenwich RHSC seminars, please contact: Vanessa Taylor V.J.Taylor@greenwich.ac.uk

Greenwich Maritime Research Seminars

Don’t forget to come along to the Greenwich Maritime Research Seminars convened by the Greenwich Maritime Centre and the National Maritime Museum.

 

GMRS Cover

 

The next talk is:

Wednesday 27th April 2016

4pm-5pm

National Maritime Museum, Seminar Room 

by

Dr Michael Talbot, University of Greenwich

‘To protect the coasts from pirate brigands’: Ottoman anti-piracy measures in the Eastern Mediterranean, 1718-70

 

This paper will examine the development of deterrent and protective naval patrols by the Ottoman navy in the Aegean and Levant seas against domestic pirates, Maltese corsairs, and European privateers. These were partly in response to demands for  protection from Ottoman provincial subjects and partly due to a developing sense of maritime territoriality.

Maritime Historian to Present at Hawksmoor Lecture Series – Peter van der Merwe

Pieter van der Merwe of the National Maritime Museum will be giving a maritime history presentation as part of the Unviersity of Greenwich Hawksmoor Lecture Series next week and we would like to invite you to attend.

The lecture will take place in our new University of Greenwich building on Stockwell Street in Greenwich town centre (opposite Café Rouge). http://www2.gre.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/465729/Greenwich.pdf

Booking is not required, the seminar is free to attend and drinks will be available afterwards. Staff on the reception desk will let you know where the Tessa Blackstone Lecture Theatre is.

This is just one of a new programme of maritime seminars that the Faculty of Architecture, Computing & Humanties will be hosting over the next few months and we hope to see you there!

Hawksmoor International Lecture Series

Pieter van der Merwe

Thursday 19th March 2015

 

Tessa Blackstone Lecture Hall 6.30pm

Reception drinks served afterwards

 

 Pieter van der Merwe read Drama at the Universities of Manchester (1967–71) and Bristol (PhD 1979). Nautical interests led to him joining the staff of the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, in 1974 and, as it General Editor since the early 1990s, he has been editor and author / joint author of many NMM publications – including an illustrated history of the Queen’s House, Greenwich, in 2012. In addition, as its Greenwich Curator, he was involved in both the early development of the Maritime Greenwich World Heritage Site (inscribed by UNESCO in 1997) and remains so in aspects of its on-going management. His other published journal and exhibition contributions have included maritime art and archaeology, and theatre (primarily scene-painting and related public exhibitions). He was appointed MBE in the New Year Honours 2012 for services to heritage and the local community in the Royal Borough of Greenwich, a Deputy Lieutenant of Greater London in October 2012 and has been Representative DL for Greenwich since January 2013.

Dr Cathryn Pearce working with National Maritime Charity to Shed Light on Shipwreck Survivors.

Dr Cathryn Pearce

A major research project has been launched into the 175 year history of national charity the Shipwrecked Mariners’ Society.

Dr Cathryn Pearce, Research Fellow in the Lifesaving and Shipwreck Group at the University of Greenwich has begun an eight month project looking into the history of the Society as part of a planned investigation into lifesaving and coastal communities around Britain between 1700 and 1914.

Commodore Malcolm Williams, Chief Executive of the Shipwrecked Mariners’ Society, said he is delighted that Cathryn is taking the time to go through the archives to shed further light on the historical work of the Society.

Malcolm explains: “Losses from shipwrecks in the 19th Century were staggering. In 1859 – a particularly bad year – 1,416 British owned merchant ships and fishing vessels were lost around Britain’s coast and with them 1,645 lives. In 1882, a more typical year, only 445 vessels were lost! Typically in the middle years of the 19th century the Society would be helping 12-13,000 people every year, including 8,000 widows, orphans and aged parents and 4,000 seafarers.

“Fortunately the Society doesn’t deal with shipwrecks on the scale it used to but our work remains as important, providing financial support to those in need, albeit in a much changed world. While our name is now more of a metaphor for what we do sadly we still deal with losses at sea, usually of single-manned fishing vessels”.

Dr Pearce said the idea for the project came out of her doctoral research, which was ultimately published in 2010 as ‘Cornish Wrecking, 1700-1860: Reality and Popular Myth’.

On the project, she commented: “After the research I began to ask questions about lifesaving and communities, such as what happened to the victims and how were they cared for? How did those communities cope with shipwreck victims who landed on their shores and the loss of their own menfolk? And what was the role of the charities, as opposed to that of the Coastguard and other governmental agencies?”

This led Dr Pearce to the Shipwrecked Mariners’ Society, which was founded in 1839. The Society provided financial assistance to the widows and families of fishermen and mariners who were lost at sea while for survivors it offered clothing, food, accommodation and paid for travel home.

She continued: “Initial research is bringing to light the sheer number of shipwrecks that occurred yearly on Britain’s shores in the 19th century and the need for assistance that ensued. In 1860 alone, for example, the Society helped 7,247 shipwreck victims, both British and from overseas. The Charity’s impressive history highlights the importance of public giving, philanthropy and humanitarianism that began in the nineteenth century and which continues to this day.”

Dr Pearce will be sharing her research with fellow academics, the Shipwrecked Mariners’ Society and local historians, as well as with the general public, in the hope that it will raise even more awareness of the Society’s work both today and in the past.

The research into the Society’s archives is being funded by Greenwich University, with a view to securing additional funding from the Art and Humanities Research Council for the larger project.

Nowadays, the Society’s primary purpose is providing financial support to retired seafarers struggling to make ends meet or who are of working age but unable to work due to ill health, an accident or for compassionate reasons. Last year, the Charity helped in over 2,200 cases of need amounting to an expenditure of £1.4 million. It received over 600 new applications for assistance.

Article Source 

joseph_mallord_william_turner_-_the_shipwreck_-_google_art_project1364159165664

The Shipwreck, Turner, 1805 – source

HMS Bulwark The Edwardian Battleship that exploded at Sheerness 26/11/1914. Why? Can anyone help? by Trevor Ware

Daily_Mirror_Placard_explosion_of_HMS_Bulwark-2

 As a result of helping research and write a book commemorating eleven men on our Church War Memorial who died in World War 1, www.theunforgotten.net , I discovered tragic and suspect evidence surrounding the explosion on board H.M.S. Bulwark with the loss of 51 officers and 740 other ranks. As I studied this evidence and the conclusions from both the Court of Enquiry and research published by Stuart R. Ball,  Mariners Mirror Vol. 72 Issue 2 1986 ‘ Life and Death of an Edwardian Battleship – A case study of HMS Bulwark’, the cause of the explosion and the death of so many trained and experienced seamen suggested to me that the Admiralty were either misled or else chose to deliberately disguise the true reasons. Since my research also uncovered ammunition explosions on board Royal Naval capital ships during the first world war, HMS Queen Mary, HMS Invincible, HMS Defence at Jutland and HMS Vanguard and HMS Glatton at Scapa Flow and Dover respectively, I decided to interrogate findings from the Bulwark enquiry to see whether common factors existed.

 

The Bulwark disaster see Conclusions of Court of Enquiry, 28 November 1914, PRO ADM 116/1370 found that the storage of ammunition in the cross passages of the battleship,which was not against regulations, had created conditions for a chain reaction when cordite packages ignited. The cross passages used for moving ammunition from the magazine hoists up to the gun turrets had no protective fire doors. The dead gunnery officers were blamed for allowing the cordite packages to be kept in the passages near to bulkheads heated up by adjacent boiler rooms. The cordite, becoming unstable and producing a volatile gas was then ignited by a spark off a shell case or some other metal object. The preliminary explosion leading back immediately into the main magazine.

 

The initial report of the Court of Enquiry proposed that the explosion started in the main magazine but Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty, rejected its findings. The final report pinned the blame directly on the actions of the ships crew and gunnery officers apparently discounting the fact that a high proportion of Bulwark’s ammunition, only taken on board between May and July 1914, was as much as 14 years old. The predicted life of this type of 6 ” and 12” ordnance was 30 years but only under certain conditions especially a stable temperature. The details of the shells supplied to HMS Bulwark from Lodge Hill  (1914) is given in  David Evans. Arming the Fleet. The development of the Royal Ordnance Yards. 1770 – 1945. English Heritage 2006.  Evans comments that ‘all previous tests were of necessity only conducted on random samples and could not guard against the possibility of a poorly manufactured batch against the rest’. Some of the randomly tested samples of the ammunition taken by Bulwark was under the 10 minute limit test which was used to establish remaining life. These were retested. The findings then showed that even these samples had ‘adequate’ future life and were thought to be ‘satisfactory’.The age of the ordnance and the imperfect methods of establishing safe life as well as the probable inconsistencies caused by supply from different ordnance  factories (6) makes a suspicion quite reasonable that some proportion of the ammunition was unstable before it was even loaded onto the ship. The shortage of ammunition for both the Army and the Navy during the opening months of the war surely meant that some batches even when considered dubious, would have been passed through the system if possible.

 

The blame for the accident could be placed on the crew of Bulwark without raising difficult questions about ordnance manufacture and current methods of testing and  handling cordite in particular. The findings of the Court of Enquiry were not released to the public and were embargoed for 60 years. This suggests that the Admiralty wished to avoid debate or criticism of their munitioning practices. After the Battle of Dogger Bank in 1915 the protection of magazines and the safe handling of ammunition on Royal Naval battlecruisers had still not been addressed although on the German  High Seas Fleet, due to the damage to the Seydlitz and the loss of the Blucher partly from ammunition explosions, an overhaul of routine handling practices and the fitting of fire doors between hoists and magazines was instigated..  See Kennedy Hickman. World War 1 ; Battle of the Dogger Bank (1915).http:// militaryhistory.about.com. It is arguable that had the British fleet also taken the same steps it would have suffered fewer losses amongst the battlefleet at Jutland one year later.

 

If the supply of poor quality and unstable cordite to Bulwark was a major contributor to the disaster how many other ships were exposed to a similar risk? As the storage of ammunition below decks in the cross corridors often close to bulkheads adjoining boiler rooms prevailed and the laborious routine checking of all cordite ‘packages’ on board overlooked, the results, both at Jutland and in other fleet actions even at Coronel later in 1914, was seriously prejudiced from the outset.

 

I am anxious to find advice from historians who have studied ammunition supply to the Navy in World War 1 and the Royal Ordnance controls over cordite quality and stability. Also the procedures for checking shells and cordite on board Royal Naval ships in the first 3 years of the war.

 

I contacted Guy Sclater R.N. Ret’d the grandson of Captain Sclater who was in command of the Bulwark when she exploded. He explained that his late mother could never talk about the tragedy or the death of her husband, although he felt certain that she considered the verdict of the 1914 Court of Enquiry unfair. For his sake and the relatives of the other officers and men blamed for the accident I would like to establish substantial evidence of the munitioning supply problems at the start of the war and the impact these might have had on the naval engagements that followed.  My e mail address is,

Trevor.Ware@btconnect.com

 

hms_bulwark_1904

Professor Sarah Palmer to present ‘Congestion, Shortage and Loss: the Port of London in the Great War’ in the Great War Greenwich Series

Capture

 

Aerial portrait of the Thames painted during the First World War

Capture 1

Capture 2

great war series

Calling all New Researchers in Maritime History

british commission logo

new researchers

The twenty-second New Researchers in Maritime History Conference will be hosted by the University
of Greenwich in the historic Old Royal Naval College. The conference provides a unique opportunity
for emerging scholars to present their work to a supportive audience in one of the world’s most
iconic maritime settings.

Applications to present will be accepted from both research degree students and by independent
scholars. The organisers welcome contributions that address all aspects of maritime history.

Paper Proposals

Those wishing to offer a paper should please complete the from http://tinyurl.com/qglnfg5.  The deadline is 12th January 2015.

Delegate Registration

Anyone interested in attending the conference without presenting a paper is warmly invited to register via our booking site . http://newresearchersmaritimehistory2015.eventbrite.co.uk

Registration Information

The registration fee includes a welcome reception including keynote address on the Friday evening;
lunch and refreshments throughout the day on the Saturday plus conference materials.

£35 standard fee; £30 student fee; presenters attend for free.

Contact the conference secretariat at: +44 (0)20 8331 7612 or maritimehistory@gre.ac.uk

image of uni

 

South Africa’s Engagement in Counter-Piracy as a Foreign Policy Decision

By  Lisa Otto 

lisa picture

South Africa became involved as a counter-piracy actor rather late in the day, after repeated calls for it to make a contribution to the scourge that was then facing the continent – Somali piracy. Despite the rise of the Somali pirate problem coming in 2007, it was not until the outward ‘ballooning’ effect of the pirates’ reach began to extend southwards towards the Mozambican Channel, that South Africa’s interest was suitably piqued.

 In December 2010 Somali pirates struck off Mozambique’s coast, and the South African Department of Defence responded to this attack on its immediate neighbour by deploying warships to Mozambique. This effort was known as Operation Copper and constituted the very beginning of South Africa’s engagement in counter-piracy efforts beyond endeavours of verbal condemnation.

Not acting on its own recognisance, but rather generously acquiescing to Mozambique’s request for assistance, piracy was suddenly thrust from the periphery of South Africa’s international agenda to a more central position than it previously enjoyed. Albeit one that did yet not necessarily beget much strategic priority.

In February 2012, South Africa’s engagement in counter-piracy became formalised through a Memorandum of Understanding signed in partnership with Mozambique and Tanzania, under the auspices of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).  Subsequently the countries have seen some success, notably in April 2012 when the partnership was put to use to fend off a pirate attack in Tanzanian waters, in collaboration with the European Union (EU) deployment.

Beyond this, Operation Copper has also worked at training efforts as a capacity-building mechanism with neighbouring countries. More recently, South Africa has begun to focus its attentions the Gulf of Guinea also, with the navy being active there in the last two years.

At the time of South Africa’s entrance as an actor in the counter piracy environment, maritime piracy in Somalia had been a problem of global concern for some years. By 2011 this experience had led to a number of experts alluding to the emergence of a new hotspot for Somali pirates in Southern African waters. Given pirates’ dynamic nature and ability to adapt to the challenges they faced, the presence of international forces in the Gulf of Aden would force pirates further south in pursuance of their victims. The trend known as ballooning saw Somali pirates venture far afield.

It was this thinking that underpinned a theory that Southern Africa would soon face dealing with the pirate scourge. This notion, coupled with the need for security in the maritime domain in light of resource discoveries off the coast of Tanzania and Mozambique as well as the active ports at Dar es Salaam, Beira and Maputo seemed to necessitate action. This, along with the successful pirate attacks in Mozambican waters in 2010, the threat must have seemed quite real to South Africa, and potentially also posed a risk to its interests off Southern Africa’s eastern coastline.

Yet, the Somali pirate scourge dwindled significantly in 2012 and 2013 as a number of activities and developments both on land and at sea paid off. Beyond this, Somali pirates have not managed to sustain their campaign further into the Indian Ocean, and ultimately southwards, given logistical challenges. The absence of a safe haven outside Somalia, as well as having to go without the intricate support network in Somalia that provide the very foundations for their activities worsens matters. Establishing new such networks (which would require an environment devoid of effective governance comparable to the erstwhile Somalia) is a task more difficult in the Southern African region given its comparative condition of peace and security. Another option would be the use of a mother ship based in international waters, but this too would require access to a regular supply of food, water, fuel and other items, usually provided by on-shore networks contracted by pirate groups.

Given this and the limited defence budget in South Africa, it may seem curious that the country committed of its limited naval assets to these endeavours. In fact, the allocation to Operation Copper alone in the 2013 budget was R585 million (US$56 million) from a total annual budget of R40 billion (or US$3.9 billion).

Says defence analyst Helmoed Heitman, “either South Africa accepts regional security responsibilities and funds an appropriate defence force, or we wind our neck in, keep quiet and hope nothing goes wrong”. He posits that despite the role of a defence force being to address threats, the budget leaves no room for this, nor for the unexpected. Thus, one might conclude that the expenditure on counter-piracy operations is a frivolous expense, given the state’s primary responsibility of protecting its territory – a place to which pirates have yet to venture. Others may argue that the fact that pirates have not entered South African waters is credit to the capabilities of the navy.

On the balance of this information, how pragmatic is South Africa’s engagement in counter-piracy? Is it a worthy exercise in foreign policy, employing foresight, or does it constitute funds misspent on threat not immediately real to South Africa?

While Heitman makes apt observations with respect to the military budget, it is worth noting that South Africa’s security apparatus are most often deployed in assistance of other nations, often in Africa. South Africa does not fear any immediate threat to its territory, and is therefore able to make use of its defence forces as a tool in the furtherance of its foreign policy objectives, key amongst which is the precedence of Africa.

The fear of pirates’ southward migration offered Pretoria the opportunity to participate through its region in keeping with the country’s foreign policy and the practice of engaging the region as a first port of call. A SADC-based initiative would also be consistent with the African Agenda and the ideal of ensuring that the collective security of the Southern African neighbourhood is safeguarded. These considerations serve to motivate the pursuance of the issue in a way that befits South Africa’s model of foreign policy quite perfectly.

Counter-piracy activities have also allowed South Africa to push back at pirate frontiers farther away from home, effectively assisting neighbours through collaborative efforts, all the while, keeping the trouble at a safe distance from South Africa’s doorstep. This may be considered a pragmatic policy decision – indeed, South Africa is a littoral state with 3,751km of coast line, dotted along which sit a number of crucially important ports with significance not just for South African but for the region as a whole.

Given South Africa’s status as an emerging nation, it also has globalised interests, being impacted by costs brought on by piracy on the global economy, as well as the domestic concerns felt by neighbours. Furthermore, it acts to bolster South Africa’s perceived involvement in a fashionable issue of international proportions, without requiring all too much effort on the part of Pretoria. This too falls squarely in line with South Africa’s implied foreign policy objective of being the foremost African actor participating in the international space – the go-to partner on the continent who leads by example where issues of African security are concerned.

In conclusion, while the cost of South Africa’s counter-piracy engagement may, on the face of it, not appear to equal its benefit, South Africa has managed to structure this engagement in a way that plays to the global image that it works to portray, while expending relatively little resources. From a practical point of view the cost does not seem to meet the minimal realities of its risk, but perhaps in this instance South Africa has made its play on the basis of strategy rather than economics.

Is it necessary for its own security to be actively fighting the pirate threat? No, it is not. But, given the transnational nature of the crime, and nondiscriminatory nature of its effects, it is of crucial importance that states, littoral and landlocked become involved, acknowledge a shared responsibility and tackle the crime as a collective. Experts have long held that a coordinated effort by the international community is needed to turn the tide in the fight against piracy. This is South Africa’s effort to do just that – in this case a responsible global actor, but primarily one taking a path of pragmatic foreign policy.

 A version of this article was first published in the African Armed Forces Journal in November 2014 as a winning entry of the AAFJ Denel writing competition, and the full version may be accessed there.

 

 sa pirates

 

 

Lest we forget? The Merchant Navy in the First World War

By

Dr Chris Ware

jutland-bf-gribble

What do we remember in this year which marks the centennial of the outbreak of the First World War, a lost generation struggling in the mud of the Western Front?

Perhaps the battle of Jutland 1916, more deadly to reputations of the commanders than the enemy; however, how many think of the comings and goings of trade, and the merchant service in general; it will be remember albeit by a few specialist historians, yet without it, the Western Front would have crumbled, not just because of the lack of men from around the Colonies and Dominions, but because arms, ammunition and food, circulated the globe by sea.

Only in 1915, and then again 1917, when Germany used the U-boats to attack merchant shipping would it come out from hiding in plain sight.  No one diminishes the toll that war on land, took, wherever in the world it might be, yet without the silent and omnipresent merchant marine many if not most of those who served in far off lands, or the Western Front, would not even have got there let alone been equipped to fight or feed and watered, they were reliant on the true expression of British sea power, the Merchant Navy.

 

remembrance-feature-300x178