Introduction

This essay examines the rate and pattern of growth of shipbuilding output in the major ports of northeast England in the nineteenth century. Competing explanations of performance are assessed in light of extant evidence in an attempt to understand why the region was so successful at shipbuilding during this period.

Performance

The northeast has long been an important centre of shipbuilding. The bulk coal and timber trades generated a high demand for shipping, which was mainly provided by local shipowners whose need for vessels was in turn satisfied largely by local yards. By the end of the eighteenth century about one-third of British shipbuilding came from the region: in 1790 the proportion was thirty-four percent and in 1800 thirty-eight percent. This share grew to an average of fifty-two percent of the UK total by 1911-1913. In both periods-and throughout most of the nineteenth century∼the northeast was the most prolific shipbuilding region in the country. Most of its output originated from the banks of two principal rivers, the Tyne and the Wear (see figure 1 and appendix table 1). Tyneside shipbuilding is usually associated with Newcastle and Wearside with Sunderland, the major settlements on their respective rivers. In practice, shipbuilding was also located at smaller settlements further up or downstream. This was particularly true on the Tyne, where as early as the end of the eighteenth century there is evidence of production at North and South Shields and Howdonpans. In the nineteenth century Wallsend also became a significant production point on the Tyne. The two rivers’ combined share of the region's total was as dominant in 1913 (sixty-eight percent) as a century earlier (sixty-two percent in 1814). Yet there were cyclical fluctuations during the century: in 1832, for example, they accounted for eighty-seven percent of local output. The ranking of secondary ports shifted spatially from the Yorkshire ports of Hull, Whitby and Scarborough north to the Teeside centres of Hartlepool, Stockton and Middlesborough. While much of the discussion will naturally focus upon the two dominant ports, reference will also be made to secondary ones, not least because their changing rank illuminates some of the issues affecting general competitive advantages within the British shipbuilding industry of the last century.