The technodiplomacy of Iberian transnational railways in the second half of the nineteenth century

Abstract

In the second half of the nineteenth century Portugal undertook an ambitious public works programme in order to develop the kingdom. In that programme, railways took a leading role, especially those routes that linked the main ports of the shoreline to Spain (and thence to France). To do so, a strenuous effort of diplomacy – or more specifically technodiplomacy – was required to convince Spain to accept cross-border links that served the goals of Portugal. In this paper I will analyse this technodiplomatic process and how two countries with different technological perceptions of railways managed to settle their differences and build five transnational links across their borders over the course of 40 years. I aim to add to the debate about the Iberian cross-border links from the point of view of the history of technology, in particular, and to the discussion about transnational technological systems, in general.

Keywords:

• Railways
• technodiplomacy
• cross-borders
• large technological systems
• Portugal

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Colin Divall, Anne McCants, and Martin Collins for their comments and suggestions.

Notes

1. Bonifácio, “A guerra de todos contra todos”, 91–134.

2. Macedo, ‘Projectar e construir a nação’, 5. Matos, “Asserting the Portuguese civil engineering identity”, 177–208.

3. Pinheiro, ‘Reflexões sobre a História,’ 53; Saraiva, ‘Inventing the Technological Nation,’ 263–273.

4. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 213–214.

5. Adas, Machines as the measure, 134.

6. Branco, O Mapa de Portugal, 85–109.

7. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 233–238.

8. Vleuten and Kaijser, “Transnational networks,” 3.

9. Vleuten, ‘Understanding Network Societies,’ 289–290.

10. Herten et al., Le Temps du Train, 38–82.

11. Tympas and Anastasiadou, ‘Constructing Balkan Europe,’ 28–30.

12. Schueler, ‘Travelling towards,’ 71.

13. Alegria, A organização dos transportes; Pinheiro, ‘L’Histoire d’un divorce’; Pereira, ‘A política ferroviária nacional,’ 334–349 and 403–416.

14. Faye et al., ‘The challenges’.

15. In this regard, Divall highlights that a superior military force or the arising of a military threat can also promote the creation of transnational railways (Divall, ‘Railway Imperialisms,’ 196). However, the scenario of an armed conflict between Portugal and Spain in the second half of the nineteenth century was very unlikely.

16. Faye et al., ‘The challenges,’ 40–43.

17. Vleuten, ‘Understanding Network Societies’; Vleuten and Kaisjer, “Transnational networks”.

18. Vleuten and Kaisjer, “Transnational networks,” 6.

19. Vleuten, ‘Understanding Network Societies,’ 286–290.

20. Hecht, The Radiance of France.

21. Schweitzer, Techno-diplomacy, V.

22. Silva and Diogo, ‘From Host and Hostage,’ 70.

23. Hughes, ‘The Electrification of America’.

24. Hecht, The Radiance of France, 16.

25. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 61–93.

26. Pereira, ‘A política ferroviária nacional,’ 334–349.

27. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 314–315.

28. Caminhos de ferro. Pareceres parlamentares de 1845 a 1884, ed. Clemente José dos Santos, Parecer sobre a proposta de Hardy Hislop, 226/1910, 3233–3234, Library of Parliament, Lisbon.

29. Conselho de Obras Públicas e Minas (1853), book 1: 291–301, Ministry of Public Works Historical Archive, Lisbon.

30. Wais, Historia de los ferrocarriles, 75–77, 144–147, and 200–205.

31. Chato, Las relaciones entre España y Portugal, 1, 162–164; Pinheiro, ‘L’Histoire d’un divorce,’ 339.

32. Pinheiro, Chemins de fer, 166.

33. Guerra, ‘Relatório da commissão’.

34. Coello, Proyecto de las lineas, 296.

35. Rina, ‘Iberismos’, 48.

36. Chato, Las relaciones entre España y Portugal, 1, 238–287.

37. Rina, ‘Iberismos’, 148–165.

38. Saraiva, ‘Inventing the Technological Nation,’ 263–273; Schueler, ‘Travelling towards,’ 82.

39. Comín et al., 150 Años, 1, 8–41, and 145–146. Mateo, ‘Los orígenes,’ 63–99.

40. Laborie, ‘A Missing Link?,’ 207.

41. Spanish engineers believed that the only way to make more powerful locomotives (essential to overcome the hilly regions of Spain) was to increase the size of the boilers, which required broader axles and therefore broader gauges. In those years, it was already known that increasing the boiler pressure and its centre of mass was the best way to increase the engines power. However, the Spanish engineers in charge of these matters were not up to date to the most recent developments in manufacturing locomotives. Hence, their opinions were dated and erroneous. Moreno, ‘El ancho de vía’, 373–390.

42. Pinheiro, ‘L’Histoire d’un divorce,’ 340.

43. The Railway Gazette, November 20, 1908, 574.

44. I use the expression of Silva and Diogo, ‘From Host and Hostage’.

45. Diario da Camara dos Deputados, April 8, 1859, 100–101.

46. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 249.

47. Watier, ‘Relatorio do engenheiro francez’.

48. Aguiar, ‘Relatorio sobre o reconhecimento’.

49. Chelmicki, ‘Relatório sobre o traçado’.

50. Pereira, ‘A política ferroviária nacional,’ 260, and 337.

51. Vieira, ‘A política de especulação,’ 736–737.

52. Chato, Las relaciones entre España y Portugal, 1, 238–287.

53. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 255.

54. Vieira, ‘A política de especulação,’ 740.

55. Pereira, ‘A política ferroviária nacional,’ 338.

56. Brandão, ‘Relatorio sobre o reconhecimento’; Couceiro, ‘Relatorio sobre o resultado’.

57. Comín et al., 150 Años, 1, 171.

58. B., ‘Caminos de hierro’; Coello, Proyecto de las lineas, 296.

59. Conselho de Obras Públicas e Minas (1864), book 19: 366–370, Ministry of Public Works Historical Archive, Lisbon.

60. Pereira, ‘A política ferroviária nacional,’ 261.

61. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 271–274.

62. Spain, Informe sobre el plan, 143–145; Cuéllar and Sánchez, 150 años de ferrocarril, 1, 228. Mateo, ‘Los orígenes,’ 99–122.

63. Mateo, ‘Los orígenes,’ 120. Page, ‘Caminhos de ferro,’ 427. Rina, ‘Iberismos’, 187–193.

64. Caminho de ferro directo entre Sevilha e Lisboa (projectos). Floor 3, cabinet 10, pack 147, process. 418/23, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Historical Archive, Lisbon.

65. Rina, ‘Iberismos’, 249–253.

66. Chato, Las relaciones entre España y Portugal, 1, 359–361; Comín et al., 150 Anõs, 1, 149–155.

67. Mateo, ‘Los orígenes,’ 122–127. Pinheiro, ‘L’Histoire d’un divorce,’ 340–344. Vidal, ‘Marchés nationaux ou internationaux?,’ 351–357.

68. Vidal, Fronteras y ferrocarriles, 60–124.

69. Caminhos de ferro de Portugal e Hespanha, box 28 (1055), pack 23, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Historical Archive, Lisbon.

70. Conselho de Obras Públicas e Minas (1876), book 37, reports of March 4, 1876, and April 27 1876, Ministry of Public Works Historical Archive, Lisbon. Portuguese Civil Engineers Association, ‘Parecer da commissão’.

71. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 289.

72. Caminhos de ferro. Reconhecimento da linha do norte de Lisboa ao Porto. Campanha de 1886, Div3/20/35/1, f. 8v, Military Historical Archive, Lisbon.

73. Entroncamento da linha ferrea do Douro. Box 1036, pack 5, letters of December 8 and 20, 1878; June 26, 1880; July 18, 1880, January 12 and 18, 1881, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Historical Archive, Lisbon. Caminhos de ferro. Pareceres parlamentares de 1845 a 1884, ed. Clemente José dos Santos, Documentos relativos ao caminho de ferro de Salamanca publicados no Diario do Governo, letter of May 28, 1880, 226/1910, 3233–3234, Library of Parliament, Lisbon. Proyecto de puente internacional sobre el río Águeda, para la unión de los Caminos de Ferro do Douro y del Ferrocarril de Salamanca a la Frontera Portuguesa en la línea Fregeneda a Barca d’Alba. C/1188/010, Archivo Historico Ferroviario, Madrid.

74. Comín, et al. 150 Años, 1, 175–176. Pereira, ‘Caminhos-de-ferro da Beira,’ 290–291. Sousa, ‘A Salamancada’.

75. Spain, Informe sobre el plan, 141.

76. Comín, et al., 150 Años, 1: 80–81 and 171–174. Prata, Políticas portuárias, 49.

77. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 483–491.

78. Gómez, Ferrocarriles y cambio económico, 117. Pereira, ‘A política ferroviária nacional,’ 345–346 and annex 20.

79. Cobos and Martínez, ‘Technological modernisation,’ 69.

80. Faye, et al., ‘The challenges,’ 44.

81. Wais, Historia de los ferrocarriles, 381–382.

82. Simão, ‘Os portos portuguêses,’ 9.

83. Prata, Políticas Portuárias, 49–52 e 63–68.

84. Vidal, ‘Marchés nationaux ou internationaux?,’ 354–356.

85. Chato, Las relaciones entre España y Portugal, 1, 356.

86. Alegria, A organização dos transportes, 289–291. Mateo, ‘Los orígenes,’ 122–127. Pinheiro; ‘L’Histoire d’un divorce,’ 340–344. Vidal, ‘Marchés nationaux ou internationaux?,’ 351–357. In the particular case of the Cáceres road, the flux of phosphates to Lisbon was annulled when the mines were connected by rail to the Mediterranean Spanish ports of Andalucía in the second half of the 1880s.

87. Faye et al., ‘The challenges,’ 40–43.

88. See for instance the following decrees/ordinances that met the need for a higher supply of grain or the conveyance of material for railway construction: Collecção Official de Legislação Portugueza, 1861: 299–300; 1863: 324–327; 1864: 257.

89. Laborie, ‘A Missing Link?,’ 202–203.

90. Collecção Official de Legislação Portugueza, 1877: 5–15.

91. Vidal, ‘Marchés nationaux ou internationaux?,’ 351–357.

92. Verbong, ‘Dutch Power Relations,’ 217.

93. Silva and Diogo, ‘From Host and Hostage,’ 70.

94. Headrick, The Tools of Empire, 163–164.

95. Santos, ‘A crise financeira de 1891’.

96. Pereira, ‘A política ferroviária nacional,’ 140–153.

97. Gazeta dos Caminhos de Ferro, November 16, 1908: 339.

98. Maier, ‘Systems Connected,’ 138.

99. Vleuten, ‘Understanding Network Societies,’ 298–299.

100. Divall, ‘Railway Imperialisms,’ 195–196.

101. Vleuten and Kaisjer, “Transnational networks,” 4.

102. Gall, ‘Atlantropa,’ 122.

103. Vleuten and Kaisjer, “Transnational networks,” 10.

104. Silva and Diogo, ‘From Host and Hostage,’ 69.

105. Ibid., 51–70.