|
Jess the woof and I went out for a walk yesterday. 12 miles non-stop,
from Briare to Chatillon sur Loire and return. We walked there along
the bank of the old canal, and back along the new one. The old one
crossed to Loire 'on the level', and the main point of the walk was to
see and photograph how this was achieved.
The old canal approaches the Loire from the south.
The first major work is a very large basin/dock/port - call it what you
will. The French call it a 'gare' (station). I think this
gare was not only a port, but also a holding point for when the passage
across the Loire was too difficult.
There is then a lock, which takes the canal down to
'normal' river level. The lock is a bit tricksy, as it will also
act as a flood gate when the winter river level gets too high. The
river, at normal levels, flows at a very good rate, so I assume that locking
up TO the river was never attempted, as at that height the river would
be a raging torrent.
Upstream of the lock, a peninsula has been built that
comes downstream parallel to the bank, forming a channel between it and
the bank, with comparatively still water in it. Nowadays, the peninsula
is incomplete, and gives the appearance of a series of islets. The
gaps between the islets lets water through, so that there is a considerable
current in the channel.
Downstream of this lock, a massive masonry causeway
protects the bank, and acts as a towing path. It leads directly
to a pier of the bridge that crosses the Loire some 600m downstream of
the lock. When it reaches the pier, the towing path continues in
the form of a helix winding up the pier to the crossing level, thus enabling
the towing animals to cross the river.
The peninsula ends upstream of the bridge.
Some 200m downstream of the bridge, on the far bank,
is the lock to take boats up the far side. Hence the boat has to
get to it via its own devices, and in the full stream of the river.
There must have been some way of organising haulage, but it's not obvious
as to what it was. Things are complicated by the fact that this
lock is angled to point downstream (to help prevent silt blocking the
entrance channel), so that boats entering and leaving have to make a turn
of more than ninety degrees against the channel.
In "Les Canaux du Loing, de Briare, d'Orleans",
Jacques de la Garde describes "cette navigation heroique", which
cost a dozen sinkings a year. The following is a rough translation
from his book, though if you fancy doing it yourself, I'd be tempted to
get someone who is really good at French to give you a more accurate translation.
Going downstream - so across from Chatillon to Briare -
boats were let down on their own two anchors - letting out all the
scope on one, then dropping the second, retrieving the first, and letting
out all the scope on the second, etc. Gulp!!!
The 'tricky' bit came when they had to turn upstream
to enter the lock - which faces downstream to avoid getting silted
up - and I guess that that's when a few boats got upset and sunk.
To make it easier for themselves, the crew of the first
boat across would secure their boat across the approach to the lock, so
that the other boats had some protection as they swung round.
Depending on the strength of the flow, the whole operation
took two to four hours.
Going upstream, after coming out of the lock the boat
would be turned upstream, and hauled by capstan up the bank until above
the lock on the southern bank. Then it would be let down and across
the river on anchors. Once across, just above the lock, it would
be secured to capstans again to be swung round into the lock. This
took three to six hours.
Using these techniques, 30 men could thus pass 18 craft
a day...
A tug was brought in in the 19th century - and
was able to cross 8000 craft a year.
The new canal crosses the Loire a few miles downstream,
using the gorgeous 600m aqueduct (Pont Canal) at Briare.
CUSTARD
I'm quite keen on custard. It's OK neat, but is
often accompanied by:
- Jam (especially ginger jam when it's available), golden syrup, honey
or stewed fruit (principally apples)
- The local bread shop does a magnificent open topped apple tart
- Mince pies, ginger cake and Christmas pud are especially good with
it
My preference is to start off with Birds' custard powder,
lots of sugar (preferably brown caster sugar ('caster' to help it dissolve,
'brown' 'cos the roughage helps one to crap nicely), milk with added milk
powder to beef it up a bit, and cornflour if it turns out a bit thin.
Birds' isn't here, but they do a 'pudding powder' which
is pretty much the same, but the local supermarkets don't have it, so
I have to use something called Crème Anglais or some such rubbish,
which definitely needs thickening with cornflour.
In the next day or two, I may start experimenting with
eggs - which I've not played Russian roulette with ever since that rather
up-front, in-your-face Conservative lady spilled the beans about all our
eggs being contaminated with bits. The hue and cry raised by the
(then) MAFF and DoH had nothing to say about the veracity of what she
said, but vilified her for frightening the GBP (Great British Public)
with such dangerous facts. Ah!! Got the name - Edwina Currie.
I've often fancied re-creating the 'sponge cake soaked
in sherry/rum and fruit juice', in the bottom of a bowl, covered by fruit
cocktail covered by custard. Unfortunately, this is best eaten cold,
and during the last 10 years I've never had the patience to wait for custard
to get cold. I suppose I should team up with a non-custardy friend
who could make me one as a surprise treat.
I have, out of shyness, not dwelt upon the sexual aspects
of custard, and on the numerous parts of the human body upon which it
can be placed whilst one licks it off one partner. Playing the part
of the licker is very much better than being the lickee, as the lickee
looses the central thrill of consuming the custard. This thrill
could be supplied if the licker agrees to participate in mouth to mouth
custard transfer. Unfortunately, my experiences as a lickee have
been most unsatisfactory. Although partners willingly agree to this,
when the time comes for mouth to mouth custard transfer to take place,
I generally land up either with nothing (they've swallowed the lot) or
with very much less than half a mouthful of something that definitely
isn't custard. Chiz! Chiz!
OZ
Lots of people seem to be visiting Oz these days.
The following items should be avoided if you wish to escape alive from
a conversation with the average Oz person. First generation Oz folk
will know of these slights, but 2nd generation onwards definitely do.
These are the three BIG reasons why the Aussies hate the Brits.
ONE: Breaker Morant
Breaker Morant was an Aussie (a Captain, I think) who
was one of the 'colonials' who fought with the Brits against the Boers
during the Boer War. Unknown to the Brits back home, the Boer war
was a dirty little war, with atrocities committed on both sides.
When the GBP became aware of this, there was a demand that Brit Forces
should refrain form being beastly to brother Boer, and that acts of beastliness
should be punished.
There seems little doubt that Breaker had been beastly
to the Boers, but no more so than countless other Brits. However,
he was caught being beastly, and he was sentenced to be shot at a court
martial. He and his colleagues were the only people to be punished
for beastliness. It is the opinion of most Aussies that he was singled
out because he was an Aussie and not a Brit. His story is told in
the aptly named book 'Scapegoat of the Empire' (which I've not read -
does anyone have a copy?), and has been filmed as 'Breaker Morant' with
Eric Woodward in the title role. The film has some gorgeous shots
of the South African high veldt.
TWO: Gallipoli
First World War campaign, generally reckoned to be the
brain child of Churchill. (Though Churchill, as the First lord of
the Admiralty, merely advocated a bombardment and blockade of the peninsula.
His superiors eventually mounted a full beach landing/invasion, to which
Churchill was very opposed.) The campaign was aimed at breaking
the deadlock on the Western front, by attacking up through Turkey.
This was to be initiated by a beach assault on the Black Sea coast at
Gallipoli. The Aussies and New Zealanders formed a very high proportion
of the attacking troops, who were very poorly led by British generals.
The Turk proved to be unexpectedly plucky fighter, and inflicted heavy
casualties on the attackers, who eventually withdrew after heavy losses.
The Turks were amazed that we hung on for as long as we did.
The Aussies have never forgiven the Brits for this debacle.
For those of a maudlin nature, this is what is inscribed
on a war memorial erected by the Turks at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli:
|
These heroes that shed their blood and lost
their lives,
You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country.
Therefore rest in peace.
There is no difference between the Johnnies and Mehmets to us,
Where they lie, side by side
Here in this country of ours.
You the mothers, who sent their sons from
far away countries,
Wipe away your tears;
Your sons are now lying in our bosom and are at peace.
After having lost their lives on this land
They have become our sons as well.
|
THREE: Jardine
Jardine (David, I think) was from the same family as
in Jardine Matheson - a company that made its fortune smuggling opium
into China - and was the 'gentleman' Captain of the English Cricket Touring
Team during the infamous 'bodyline' series, where the basic ploy (dreamed
up by Jardine) was to aim the ball at the batsman's head in the hope of
knocking him out - a ploy which proved to be highly successful.
Jardine's name is HATED in Oz.
(As an aside, the implementer of the ploy, fast bowler
Harold Larwood, was not blamed at all - he was seen as merely carrying
out the instructions of his Captain. When he retired from cricket
he went to live in Oz, where he was welcomed, and lived very happily until
old age overtook him not so many years ago).
That's all, Folks!!
Toodle pip!!
Bill
|