4 ms·

Interesting article. But "London and New York, the world’s current leading cities, share Shanghai’s foundational geographic logic. Their safe harbours are easil

Interesting article. But "London and New York, the world’s current leading cities, share Shanghai’s foundational geographic logic. Their safe harbours are easily accessible to the world’s trade, and their Thames and Hudson Rivers provided a ready route into a huge hinterland." Does Thames really lead to a "huge hinterland". Does a small island like the UK even have a huge hinterland? Also, the hudson doesn't lead to a "huge hinterland" either. The mississippi and missouri rivers does though. I think it's a bit of a stretch to compare the yangtze river ( shanghai ) with the hudson or thames rivers.

raverbashing 7y ago
True, not to mention other ports like Liverpool, in England, that are more similar to NY Though fluvial/maritime transport plays a part, it is not the whole story (also see Paris)
jvanloov 7y ago
The way I understand "hinterland" is "the geographical area where goods from the harbour can easily be transported to". This can be over water (river or canals), but also by train or truck.
- npongratz 7y ago
  Not GP, but I suspect the "huge" part of "huge hinterland" is the main aspect being questioned.
raldi 7y ago
> Also, the hudson doesn't lead to a "huge hinterland" What in the world? The Hudson leads to the Erie Canal which leads to the Great Lakes which lead to the largest system of navigable waters on Earth which happens to be right on top of the largest mass of arable land on the planet.
- basetop 7y ago
  NYC was already the largest US city before the eerie canal was completed. It wasn't the eerie canal that made NYC, the eerie canal was created because NYC was the most important city in the US. Whereas the article's point was that the rivers ( like shanghai ) and its access to the hinterlands is what drove the development of shanghai. The complete opposite is the case for NYC. Also, do you know which river the the great lakes feed into? The mississippi river which bisects the land with the most arable land on earth. The missouri river also cuts through much of the continental US. The hudson river doesn't. I've lived along the hudson river pretty much all my life, so you can take my word on this. If you think the thames or the hudson river is anywhere comparable to the yangtze, mississippi or the missouri, I suggest you take another look at what these rivers are. The hudson barely spans a few hundred miles in length. The yangtze, missouri and mississipi span a few thousand miles deep into the hinterlands of china and the US respectively. Compared to the mississipi or the yantze or the missouri, the hudson river is a stream.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - raldi 7y ago
    In 1825, Clinton also helped break ground for the Ohio & Erie Canal, which was viewed as an extension of the Erie Canal and joined the Hudson with the Mississippi and New York City with New Orleans. By then, other Eastern Seaboard cities had great harbors, but none had a comparable water tributary to the expanding interior of the United States. [...] In 50 years, New York City had grown from 120,000 people to more than a million in 1870. What historians called “a river of gold” flowing into the city’s lap had also proved to be a triumph of a fledgling democracy and capitalism, said James S. Kaplan, president of the Lower Manhattan Historical Association. What was known as the Great Western Canal exported New York’s politics and principles to the rest of the nation. [...] The canal affirmed New York’s political ascendancy over Virginia and the rest of the South (four of the first five presidents were Virginians) and its commercial dominance over competing ports not just on the Eastern Seaboard, but all the way to New Orleans. No wonder that in his “Wedding of the Waters: The Erie Canal and the Making of a Great Nation” (2005), Peter L. Bernstein wrote: “A town with an imperial name was about to witness the birth of a project that would turn New York into an imperial state.” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/nyregion/history-of-the-erie-canal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/nyregion/history-of-the-e...
mannykannot 7y ago
When London and New York were growing to their peaks of global significance, their hinterlands had a significant share of global economic activity.

raverbashing 7y ago

True, not to mention other ports like Liverpool, in England, that are more similar to NY Though fluvial/maritime transport plays a part, it is not the whole story (also see Paris)

jvanloov 7y ago

The way I understand "hinterland" is "the geographical area where goods from the harbour can easily be transported to". This can be over water (river or canals), but also by train or truck.

npongratz 7y ago
Not GP, but I suspect the "huge" part of "huge hinterland" is the main aspect being questioned.

raldi 7y ago

> Also, the hudson doesn't lead to a "huge hinterland" What in the world? The Hudson leads to the Erie Canal which leads to the Great Lakes which lead to the largest system of navigable waters on Earth which happens to be right on top of the largest mass of arable land on the planet.

basetop 7y ago
NYC was already the largest US city before the eerie canal was completed. It wasn't the eerie canal that made NYC, the eerie canal was created because NYC was the most important city in the US. Whereas the article's point was that the rivers ( like shanghai ) and its access to the hinterlands is what drove the development of shanghai. The complete opposite is the case for NYC. Also, do you know which river the the great lakes feed into? The mississippi river which bisects the land with the most arable land on earth. The missouri river also cuts through much of the continental US. The hudson river doesn't. I've lived along the hudson river pretty much all my life, so you can take my word on this. If you think the thames or the hudson river is anywhere comparable to the yangtze, mississippi or the missouri, I suggest you take another look at what these rivers are. The hudson barely spans a few hundred miles in length. The yangtze, missouri and mississipi span a few thousand miles deep into the hinterlands of china and the US respectively. Compared to the mississipi or the yantze or the missouri, the hudson river is a stream.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- raldi 7y ago
  In 1825, Clinton also helped break ground for the Ohio & Erie Canal, which was viewed as an extension of the Erie Canal and joined the Hudson with the Mississippi and New York City with New Orleans. By then, other Eastern Seaboard cities had great harbors, but none had a comparable water tributary to the expanding interior of the United States. [...] In 50 years, New York City had grown from 120,000 people to more than a million in 1870. What historians called “a river of gold” flowing into the city’s lap had also proved to be a triumph of a fledgling democracy and capitalism, said James S. Kaplan, president of the Lower Manhattan Historical Association. What was known as the Great Western Canal exported New York’s politics and principles to the rest of the nation. [...] The canal affirmed New York’s political ascendancy over Virginia and the rest of the South (four of the first five presidents were Virginians) and its commercial dominance over competing ports not just on the Eastern Seaboard, but all the way to New Orleans. No wonder that in his “Wedding of the Waters: The Erie Canal and the Making of a Great Nation” (2005), Peter L. Bernstein wrote: “A town with an imperial name was about to witness the birth of a project that would turn New York into an imperial state.” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/nyregion/history-of-the-erie-canal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/nyregion/history-of-the-e...

mannykannot 7y ago

When London and New York were growing to their peaks of global significance, their hinterlands had a significant share of global economic activity.