The 950mm-gauge line from Massawa on the coast, inland to Agordot, was built during colonial occupation by the Italians with some steep gradients which meant that Mallets were considered to be suitable motive power.
The line should not be confused with the metre-gauge line running from Djibouti to Addis Ababa. A metre-gauge railway that was originally built by the French from 1894 to 1917 which has since been replaced by a Chinese built standard-gauge line. [5]
In 1907, Maffei built three 0-4-4-0T locomotives for the Massawa to Agerdot line.
Ansaldo the “supplied twenty five further engines of the same class between 1911 and 1915, and in 1931 and 1939 Asmara shops assembled a nominal three new engines from d components of earlier withdrawn engines. All these were standard European narrow-gauge Mallet tanks, saturated, slide-valved and with inside frames.” [1: p64]
In the mid-1930s, a series of fifteen larger 0-4-4-0T locomotives were built. These were “built to a superheated, simple expansion design, of which ten had piston valves and Walschearts gear and the other five, Caprotti poppet valves driven from outside cardan shafts.” [1: p65] A later series of “eight engines built by Analdo in 1938 reverted to compound expansion, retaining the superheater and piston valve features.” [1: p65]
The last of the Eritrean Mallets was built in their own shops in 1963, making it the last Mallet built in the world. [6]
The line closed in 1975. Eritrea was occupied by Ethiopia for many years. After gaining independence in 1993, some of the former railway staff started to rebuild their totally destroyed railway. Some of the Mallets, built by Ansaldo (Italy) in 1938, were brought back to life. Also one of the small Breda built shunters, two diesel locos and two diesel railcars (one from 1935) were put back into working order. [7]
A section of the line, between Massawa, on the coast, and Asmara, was reopened in 2003 and has offered an opportunity for Mallet locomotives to be seen in operation in East Africa. Indeed, an internet search using Google brings to light a list of videos of locomotives heading tourist trains in the Eritrean landscape.
Wikipedia notes that the line has a track-gauge of 950mm and that locomotives operate over a 118 km section of the old line. Italian law from 1879 officially determined track gauges, specifying the use of 1,500 mm (4 ft 11 1⁄16 in) and 1,000 mm (3 ft 3 3⁄8 in) gauge track measured from the centre of the rails, or 1,445 mm (4 ft 8 7⁄8 in) and 950 mm (3 ft 1 3⁄8 in), respectively, on the inside faces. [4]
Between Arbaroba and Asmara in November 2008, a single coach is headed by one of the surviving Mallet locomotives. This is an extract from an image on Wikimedia Commons (public domain). [13]
Steam operation on the line is over, no regular services are provided but occasional tours still take place with plenty of caveats about the availability of any form of propulsion. An example is a German-speaking tour planned (as of 24th March 2024) for November 2024. [8]
Tanzania (Tanganyika)
The metre-gauge line inland from Dar-es-Salaam was built by the Ost Afrika Eisenbahn Gesellschaft (East African Railway Co.). A.E. Durrant tells us that its first main line power “was a class of typical German lokalbahn 0-4-4-0T Mallets, built by Henschel in 1905-7. These were supplemented in 1908 by four larger 2-4-4-0Ts from the same builder, after which the railway turned to straight eight-coupled tank and tender engines.” [1: p67]
R. Ramaer notes that the first locomotives used by the Usambara Eissenbahn (UE) on the Tanga Line were five 0-4-2 locos which arrived on the line in 1893. Rising traffic loads led the UE “To look for something more substantial and in 1900, Jung supplied five compound Mallet 0-4-4-0T’s as numbers 1-5, later renumbered 6-10. … To provide enough space for the firebox and ashpan, the rigid high-pressure part, comprising the third and fourth axles, had outside frames, whereas the low-pressure part had inside frames.” [9: p19]
UE engine No. 1 (0-4-4-0T – supplied by Jung) with an early passenger train ready for departure at Tanga station in 1890. This image was posted on the Urithi Tanga Museum Facebook Page [10] and is also reproduced in R. Ramaer’s book. [9: p19]UE Mallet 0-4-4-0T No. 8 heading a passenger train at Mombo. This image was shared in error on the Old Asmara Eritrea Facebook Page. [11] It also appears in R. Ramaer’s book. [9: p20]
On the Central Line (Ost Afrikanische Eisenbahn Gesellschaft – or OAEG) which ran inland from Dar-es-Salaam, construction work started in 1905 and the first locomotives used by the OAEG were four 0-4-0T engines built by Henschel, a further four of these locomotives were supplied in 1909. These small engines had a surprisingly long life. Mallets were first supplied in 1905 by Henschel and were suitable for both coal and oil firing. These were 0-4-4-0T locos (four supplied in 1905 and one supplied in 1907). “The problem with this type of engine was the restricted tractive effort and running was not satisfactory because of the lack of a leading pony truck. … Therefore Henschel supplied a second batch of four locomotives in 1908 as 2-4-4-0Ts with larger boilers and cylinders. They also had a higher working pressure of 14 atmospheres (200lb/sq in) in comparison to 12 atmospheres (170lb/sq in) for the earlier engines, while the bunker capacity had been increased from 1.2 to 2.2 tonnes of coal. (Oil fuel had been discarded).” [9: p21-23]
OAEG 2-4-4-0T No. 27, in the last Mallet class to be built for German East Africa. This locomotive appears in the Wikipedia list of Henschel steam locomotives. [12] It also appears in R. Ramaer’s book [9: p23] and A.E. Durrant’s book. [1: p66]
Kenya-Uganda
An ‘MT’ class locomotive in ex-Works condition at the Queen’s Park works of the North British Locomotive Co. [1: p66]
Mallets were the first articulated locomotives to operate in East Africa. Mallets were introduced on the Uganda Railway in 1913. A.E. Durrant notes that they consisted of “a batch of eighteen 0-6-6-0 compound Mallets to what was the North British Locomotive Co’s standard metre-gauge design, as supplied also to India, Burma, and Spain. They had wide Belpaire fireboxes, inside frames and piston valves for the high pressure cylinders only. Built at Queens Park works in 1912-1913, these locomotives entered service in 1913-14 and remained at work until 1929-30, when they were replaced by the EC2 and EC2 Garratts.” [1: p66]
North British Class ‘MT’ Mallets arrived in Kenya just before the start of WW1. [2]
These locomotives were given the classification ‘MT’ within the Uganda Railway fleet. Disappointing performance and high maintenance costs led to them being relegated to secondary duties and eventually being scrapped in the late 1920s as the Beyer Garratt locomotives began to arrive. [2] Their presence on the system was heralded by, “Railway Wonders of the World,” with the picture shown below. [3]
An ‘MT’ class Uganda Railway locomotive as illustrated in ‘Railway Wonders of the World’. [3]
References
A.E. Durrant; The Mallet Locomotive; David & Charles, Newton Abbot, Devon, 1974.
Kevin Patience; Steam in East Africa; Heinemann Educational Books (E.A.) Ltd., Nairobi, 1976.
Uganda has begun restoring a disused branch of a railway line built under the British Empire, which it hopes will offer a cheaper way to transport goods to neighbouring countries. … Work has begun to restore nearly 400 kilometres of the tracks between Tororo in eastern Uganda, near the border with Kenya, and Gulu in the north, near South Sudan.
“Our ambition is to move all long-distance bulk cargo transportation onto rail from roads in a few years because rail is cheaper in terms of cost and time,” a spokesperson for for state-run Uganda Railways Corporation, John Linnon Sengendo, told Reuters news agency.
Uganda decided to revamp the old network after plans to build a separate, modern line failed to secure funding from China.
The government cancelled its contract with a Chinese firm earlier this year and is now seeking a new contractor for the project, which would see the construction of a standard gauge railway linking the Ugandan capital Kampala to the Kenyan border, where it would join up with Kenya’s modern lines.
Another Chinese contractor, China Road and Bridge Corporation, will repair the old line over two years at a cost of 200 billion shillings (50.6 million euros) to the Ugandan government, Sengendo said.
Uganda’s railway network fell into disrepair during the country’s economic collapse in 1970s and early ’80s.
Ugandan officials hope once the link is restored, rail will replace trucks in shipping transit goods to South Sudan and north-eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
Under its East African Railway Master Plan, the East African Community regional bloc is aiming to revive lines serving Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda and extend them to Rwanda and Burundi. Ultimately it hopes to add South Sudan and Ethiopia to the network too.
A recently relaid section of metre-gauge track in Kampala, (c) Sylvia Katushabe
Uganda’s planned overhaul of the metre gauge railway to cut transport costs on the Northern Corridor and improve trade competitiveness has entered its final stages, even as the country faces a shortage of equipment, wagons, and trains.
The EastAfrican has learnt [that] Spanish firm Imathia Construction has completed replacing steel sleepers with concrete beams on the Namanve-Kampala section of the line, which is expected to be handed over this month, Uganda Railways Corporation (URC) publicist John Lenon Sengendo said, adding that the contractor will then embark on the final section, Namanve-Mukono.
This will be the second section of the track to be completed after rehabilitation of the Tororo-Namanve line, including the line to Jinja Pier, which was completed a year ago. While the Malaba-Namanve metre gauge track is now in fair condition, importers, exporters, and shippers remain sceptical about switching to rail, citing a shortage of rolling stock and inefficiency, which has resulted in 90 percent of traffic on the Northern Corridor being carried by road and only about seven percent is carried by rail because of the poor state of rail infrastructure.
As a result, transport costs are comparatively high on the Northern Corridor, ranging from 20 cents to 25 cents per tonne per kilometre for road transport, while the cost for rail transport ranges from US cents 6 to US cent 12 per tonne per kilometre, depending on the type of cargo.
The shortage of rolling stock is partly blamed on URC. A June 2022 Uganda’s Auditor General after reviewing URC’s asset register, had 521 wagons located in different parts of Kenya.
But only 128 wagons exist, leaving a balance of 393 wagons unaccounted for, raising fears of a possibility of URC overstating its asset values in the financial statements.
[A] URC accounting officer explained that “there were many wagons left in Kenya by RVR (U) Ltd upon concession termination. A repatriation exercise to return these assets to Uganda commenced in July 2021 and by December 2021, a total of 243 wagons had been brought back.”
Under this project, Uganda is to buy 3,000 horsepower locomotives by 2026. The number of Uganda government-owned wagon ferries is also expected to increase from the current two to four, a development set to help URC meet the growing traffic demand on Lake Victoria.
The other financiers are the African Development Bank, which will provide $233.2 million, and the African Development Fund to provide $100.7 million – both concessional loans to finance the construction and purchase of rolling stock, which includes locomotives, wagons and coaches.
URC’s target is to move cargo from road to rail, and we expect to be moving six million tonnes a year.
In its efforts to revamp the metre gauge railway, Uganda is also reviving the route from Tororo in Eastern Uganda to Gulu City in the north. The line is currently under construction. Significantly, the city also hosts the Gulu Logistics Hub, whose phase one is also under construction. … The hub – which will be rail-linked – was planned as a strategic location connecting to the growing markets of Congo and South Sudan.
Kenyan government to spend $731m on new trains, SGR revamp
An SGR cargo train at the Naivasha Inland Container Depot in Kenya. Kenya’s National Treasury report shows Transport ministry will receive $714.7 million for the “Development of Standard Gauge Railway” between July this year and June 2026. [2]
The government of Kenya has stepped up expenditure on the Nairobi-Mombasa standard gauge railway (SGR) with a plan to hit Ksh100 billion ($731.53 million) in the next three years to revamp the line, build new sidings and buy more locomotives and cargo wagons.
A report by Kenya’s National Treasury shows that the country’s Transport ministry will receive an additional Ksh97.7 billion ($714.7 million) for the “Development of Standard Gauge Railway” between July this year and June 2026.
This reverses a trend where the previous government had cut allocations to the SGR and will push the spending related to this line beyond KSh780 billion ($5.7 billion) by June 2026.
Beginning July, the Kenyan government has allocated Ksh37.4 billion ($275.79 million) from the Railway Development Levy Fund (RDLF) for the Nairobi-Mombasa SGR.
A Mombasa-bound SGR passenger train on the extended viaduct in the ‘Maneaters Area’. The line is set at high level to allow the safe passage of wildlife, (c) Wachira Mwangi. [2]
The bulk of the allocation, according to the breakdown shared with the Business Daily from transport, has been earmarked for the acquisition of additional locomotives and freight wagons at a cost of Ksh11.9 billion ($87.1 million).
Kenya last bought its 1,620 locomotives and wagons from China in 2018.
State had no plans for extension – The allocations to transport ministry show that the government had no plans to extend the SGR beyond Naivasha to Kisumu and finally Malaba in the next three years.
The rest of the funds, which have been allocated under the “Mombasa to Nairobi SGR” vote will largely be used to build new feeder lines and rehabilitate the old metre gauge railway (MGR) lines.
Charged at the rate of two percent, the Railway Development Fund (RDF) is levied on all goods imported into the country for home use.
“The purpose of the levy shall be to provide funds for the construction of a standard gauge railway network in order to facilitate the transportation of goods,” reads part of the Miscellaneous Fees and Levies Act which establishes the kitty.
Budgetary allocations for the acquisition of locomotives and wagons are projected to increase to Ksh16 billion ($117 million) in Financial Year 2024/25 and Ksh22.2 billion ($162.4 million) in the Financial Year 2025/26 taking the total allocations for the three years to Ksh50.1 billion ($366.5 million).
Another Ksh5.9 billion ($43.16 million) will be spent on the rehabilitation, remanufacturing or overhaul of locomotives, wagons and coaches, according to a breakdown of the Ksh37.4 billion ($273.6 million) allocation.
The new feeder lines will link some of the sections of the modern railway such as the Mombasa SGR Terminus to critical urban centres.
This includes Ksh4.48 billion ($32.77 million) for the construction of the Riruta-Lenana-Ngong Railway Line and Ksh2.96 billion ($21.65 million) for the construction of a Railway Metro Line linking Embakasi Station and Ruai town.
In the next 12 months, the government will also build a new 2.8-kilometre Metre Gauge Railway (MGR) link from Mombasa SGR Terminus to Mombasa MGR station at a cost of Ksh2.5 billion ($18.29 million).
These funds will also be used to construct a railway bridge across the Makupa causeway that links Mombasa Island to the Kenyan mainland.
New MGR line – A new Metre Gauge Railway (MGR) line linking the Naivasha Inland Container Depot to the existing Longonot Railway Station has been allocated Ksh1.6 billion ($11.7 million) in the next financial calendar.
The construction of a Railway Metro Line connecting Athi River Station to the East African Portland Cement has been allocated Ksh400 million ($2.93 million).
This is projected to rise to Ksh1.17 billion ($8.56 million) in the Financial Year starting July next year and Sh1.36 billion in Financial Year 2025/26.
Another Railway Metro Line connecting Athi River Station to NSSF and Mavoko will absorb Ksh450 million ($3.3 million), a figure that is set to increase to Ksh1.56 billion ($11.4 million) and Ksh1.89 billion ($13.83 million) in 2024/25 and 2025/26.
The money will also be used to rehabilitate the line between Longonot and the Western border town of Malaba, which is aimed at facilitating the movement of cargo from the port city of Mombasa to Uganda.
Also in this border town, which is prone to congestion, the State plans to build Malaba Cargo Handling Yard. Around Ksh474 million ($3.45 million) has been set aside for this project.
Other spending items will be the acquisition of plant and equipment, which shall take up Ksh3.8 billion ($27.8 million) in the next fiscal year, Sh1.1 billion in Financial Year 2024/25 and Ksh600 million ($4.4 million) in the Financial Year 2025/26.
Logistics Hub – A logistics hub is planned for Athi River with the state putting aside Ksh1.125 billion ($8.23 million).
The allocation for this planned logistics hub will reduce to Ksh375 million ($2.74 million) in the year ending June 2025.
Initial plans were to extend the SGR to Uganda; however, this has since stalled with the Treasury not getting funds for the extension to Kisumu and finally to Malaba.
Murkomen at the beginning of this year said the Kenya Kwanza administration in partnership with the Chinese government is keen on extending the SGR from Naivasha’s Mai Mahiu to the border of Uganda through a five-year plan that will see the multibillion-dollar railway line run through Narok, Bomet, Nyamira, Kisumu, and Malaba.
“In the long run, we would like to complete the connection of the SGR from Suswa to Kisumu through Bomet, Nyamira, parts of Kisii and later to Malaba. Later, we can think of upgrading the existing MGR via Nakuru to Kisumu and via Eldoret to Malaba,” he said on December 15, 2022.
With the additional expenditure, the government hopes the country’s most expensive piece of infrastructure will help to grow the economy and improve the standard of living for Kenyans.
The administration of former President Uhuru Kenyatta borrowed Ksh656.1 billion ($4.8 billion) in three tranches for the construction of the two phases of the SGR, contributing to a major build-up of Kenya’s stock of debt.
Kenya will use Ksh11.9 billion ($87 million) to acquire rolling stock that will be used to ferry cargo on the SGR from Mombasa to Naivasha.
Grand $15 billion plan to expand Kenya SGR to Kisumu, Malaba, Isiolo
The standard gauge railway line at the Naivasha Inland Container Depot, a transhipment hub for Kenya’s SGR from Mombasa, which is to extend to the proposed Malaba railway line in Uganda. [3]
Kenya has set sights on a Ksh2.1 trillion ($15.3 billion) plan to extend the standard gauge railway (SGR) to Kisumu, Malaba and Isiolo by the end of June 2027, a government document seen by the Business Daily shows.
According to the plan, the State Department of Transport will build another 2,746 kilometres of the SGR at $15.3 billion, a move that will push the total spend on the modern railway to more than Ksh2.75 trillion ($20 billion).
The plan, lifted from the Jubilee Government’s grand scheme on SGR (so far Kenya’s most expensive project), is part of the Ksh3.42 trillion ($24.9 billion) Lamu Port South Sudan-Ethiopia Transport (Lapsset).
Lapsset is aimed at opening up northern Kenya and revamping the northern corridor by spurring movement within Kenya, South Sudan and Ethiopia.
It is an ambitious scheme that will not only see the modern railway reach the border town of Malaba via Kisumu, as it was initially envisioned, but also Isiolo, Moyale and the island of Lamu.
The line will move from Mariakani in Mombasa County to Lamu to Isiolo. From Isiolo, the SGR will be connected to the northeastern town of Moyale which borders Ethiopia.
From Isiolo, the government will extend the SGR to Nairobi, connecting the country’s capital city and commercial hub to northern Kenya and finally to Ethiopia.
From Naivasha, the SGR is extended to Malaba through Kisumu.
The bulk of the financing for these additional kilometres of the SGR, around Ksh1.8 trillion ($13 billion), will be from external financiers that the document has not revealed while the rest will come from the Kenyan government.
So far, the SGR from Mombasa to Naivasha has been financed by the Chinese at a total cost of Ksh656.1 billion ($4.7 billion)
The longest stretch of the planned SGR, 753.2 kilometres, will be from Isiolo to Nakodok, a small town near the border between Kenya and South Sudan.
The Transport Ministry, headed by Kipchumba Murkomen, has cost this phase of the SGR at Ksh443.2 billion ($3.2 billion).
From Lamu to Isiolo, a distance of 544.4 kilometres, the Ruto administration plans to build the rail line at Ksh348.7 billion ($2.5 billion).
From Isiolo to Moyale, a distance of 475.9 kilometres, the country is expected to use Ksh317.8 billion ($2.3 billion) to build a new SGR line.
The line connecting Mariakani to Lamu of 325.3 kilometres will cost Ksh257.3 billion ($1.8 billion).
Locations on Kenya’s planned SGR network. [3]
There will be another line of 278 kilometres connecting Nairobi to Isiolo that will consume Ksh239.2 billion ($1.7 billion).
Phase 2B of the SGR from Naivasha to the lakeside city of Kisumu will cost Sh380 billion while the last leg, 2C, from Kisumu to Malaba bordering Uganda will take another Ksh122.9 billion ($896 million).
The document from the State Department of Transport reveals what appears like a near-impossible feat of the government wanting to complete the entire transport circuit in four years from 2023 to 2027.
Although the ministry’s document indicates that construction of these railway lines is to begin at the start of July this year, no budgetary allocation has been made for the SGR for the next three financial years.
In 2014, the government entered into a tripartite agreement with the governments of Rwanda and Uganda to construct a standard gauge railway from Mombasa through Kampala to Kigali, Rwanda.
However, the SGR ended abruptly in Naivasha with China reportedly declining to finance the last leg of the modern railway after failing to strike an agreement with Uganda.
The new administration of President Ruto has rekindled plans to complete the SGR.
Through a partnership with the Chinese government, Mr Murkomen said earlier this year the government wanted to extend the SGR from Naivasha’s Mai Mahiu to the border of Uganda through a five-year plan that will see the multibillion-dollar railway line run through Narok, Bomet, Nyamira, Kisumu, and finally Malaba.
“In the long run, we would like to complete the connection of the SGR from Suswa to Kisumu through Bomet, Nyamira, parts of Kisii and later to Malaba. Later, we can think of upgrading the existing MGR via Nakuru to Kisumu and via Eldoret to Malaba,” the CS said in a statement on December 15 last year.
The Transport Ministry has been allocated Ksh100 billion ($729 million) from the Railway Development Levy Fund (RDLF) for the next three years to revamp the existing SGR line from Mombasa to Naivasha via Nairobi and build new sidings.
The money will also be used to buy more locomotives and cargo wagons, which are aimed at improving the freight capacity of the modern railway which is still facing cut-throat competition from trucks.
Plans to revamp the SGR involve mostly building new metre gauge railway (MGR) or rehabilitating them.
New Concrete Sleepers for the Metre-Gauge in Uganda
New Vision reported that, on 1st September 2023, President Yoweri Museveni opened a new Concrete sleeper making facility at Kawolo, Buikwe District, Kampala. The sleepers are to be used in the rehabilitation of the metre-gauge railway line.
The traditional steel sleepers are no longer in favour. Thefts and vandalism mean that alternatives have had to be sought. [6]
The old steel sleepers on the right. The new concrete sleepers in ballast on the left. [7]
The sleepers are being used on the Kampala to Namanve line before being rolled out to other projects. The construction of the factory valued at over 19 million Euros (about 76 billion Uganda Shillings) started in June 2020.
On-going work on the Kampala to Namanve line. [8]
The use of concrete sleepers on the suburban lines will be supplemented by the procurement of diesel multiple units and additional coaches.
“In August 2020, URC said the Government had secured funding from the Spanish government and African Development Bank (AfDB) to the tune of shillings 1.3 trillion to revamp the Metre Gauge Railway by rehabilitating about 250 kilometres from Malaba to Kampala.” [6]
On 1st February 2024, work on the Kampala to Namanve line was close to completion and a predicted opening in March 2024. [9]
Kenya Railways puts proposed Lapsset SGR costs at $16 billion: bulk on Isiolo-Nakodok line
Kenya will need at least Ksh 2.4 trillion ($16 billion) to construct a proposed Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) on the Lamu Port-South Sudan-Ethiopia-Transport (Lapsset) corridor, according to projections by the Kenya Railways Corporation.
According to the parastatal, it would cost Ksh 523.05 billion ($3.49 billion) to build a 544.4 km SGR link to connect Lamu and Isiolo and a further Ksh 476.7 billion ($3.178 billion) to extend the line from Isiolo to Moyale over a distance of 475.9 km.
The largest spending would be on constructing the SGR line from Isiolo to Nakodok town on the border between Kenya and South Sudan over a distance of 753.2 km at a cost of Ksh664.65 billion ($4.431 billion).
Kenya Railways has estimated that a further Ksh 358.8 billion ($2.392 billion) will be required to link Isiolo and Nairobi via SGR over a distance of 278.6 km and a further Ksh 385.95 billion ($2.573 billion) for the 325.35 km stretch between Lamu and Mariakani.
The entire stretch will cover a total of 2,377.45 km, translating into a cost of Ksh 1 billion ($6.667 million) for every kilometre of the SGR.
But the cost of undertaking such a colossal venture, which would be by far the most expensive in Kenya’s history, will be far higher than Kenya Railways’ estimates considering the company did the costing at an exchange of Ksh150/US dollar.
The parastatal has nonetheless expressed confidence in raising Ksh275.9 billion ($1.84 billion) or 11.4 percent of the total project cost by the financial year 2027/28 through funding from the government, collections from the Railway Development Levy Fund (RDLF) and loans.
Kenya in 2014 began construction of Phase 1 of the SGR line between Mombasa and Nairobi covering 472km. Phase 2A Nairobi-Naivasha (120km) was constructed in 2017. The project was funded by a $5.08 billion loan from China.
“The SGR line has led to expansion of the Inland Container Depot (ICD) in Nairobi at Embakasi, and construction of the ICD – Naivasha at Mai Mahiu,” said Kenya Railways.
The firm added: “This has contributed to decongestion of the seaport of Mombasa and facilitated seamless transit of goods destined to Western Kenya and neighbouring countries.”
Already, two studies have been undertaken to explore the feasibility of a Lapsset corridor railway by Japan Port Consultants in 2009 and China Civil Engineering Construction Company (2015). The latter study estimated the cost of the project at $10.4 billion with a financial rate of return of between nine percent and 12 percent.
The proposal to build an SGR line along the Lapsset corridor is however not feasible yet as the Lapsset project has failed to take off due to lack of funding as well as insecurity. Kenya is also facing a huge debt pile which has been worsened by the rapid depreciation of the Kenyan shilling leading to a surge in foreign currency external loans.
This article looks at two tramway routes which were built. The first ran from Nice to Bendejun via Pont de Peille and Contes. The second branched of the first at Pont de Peille and ran to along the valley of the Paillon de Peille to La Grave de Peille. It also covers a proposed tramway to l’Escarene which was not constructed.
Nice to Contes and Bendejun
This line was approximately 18.6 km long. The first part of the route (from Nice Place Garibaldi as far as La Trinite Victor) ran along the same rails as the urban service – a length of around 6.5km.Just over 9 km of line (which was deemed to be part of the coastal (littoral) network) brought trams to Contes. The final length of the line was regarded as part of the TNLs ‘departemental’ network and took trams to the terminus at Bendejun.
Only approximately 0.5 km of the line and (as far as Contes) was on the level. The remainder of the line was set at varying gradients with the steepest being 55mm/m. The line rose from 12 metres above sea-level at Place Garibaldi to 189 metres above sea-level at Contes, and 260 metres above sea-level at Bendejun.
The following notes on the significant dates associated with the line are gleaned from Jose Banaudo’s book. [1: p70] …
The line from Garibaldi to Abbatoirs opened to the public on 21st February 1900. On 2nd June of the same year, the line opened from Abbatoirs to Contes. Goods were carried on this section of the line from 1st October 1900.
It was not until 1st February 1909 that passengers could travel between Contes and Bendejun and no goods were carried along that length of the line until 1st January 1911.
After just over a year, in February 1912, subsidence closed the length of the line between Contes and Bendejun. The line opened again in March. During the winter of 1916-1917, the line was closed by snow and landslides.
On 1st January 1923 tram services were given new numbers: Nice to La Trinite or Drap became No. 26; Nice to Contes or Bendejun, No. 27.
Sadly, after further problems with landslides, the line between Contes and Bendejun was permanently closed from 18th November 1926.
On 8th October 1934 renumbering led to the line to La Trinite being numbered 36 and the Nice to Contes service, 37.
A landslide affected the line between the cement works and Contes. It was closed from November 1934 to March 1935.
Late in 1935, the Nice terminus of these services was moved from Place Garibaldi to Rue Geoffredo.
After damage to the electricity substation adjacent to Pont-de-Peille on 12th February 1938, the passenger service from Drap to Contes was curtailed and the No. 37 service was replaced by buses.
There was opposition to the bus service being provided by a single company. This saw a reopening of the tram service on Ligne 37 on 15th March 1938. There followed a period between 3rd August 1938 and December 1944 when tramway services were interrupted relatively frequently for a variety of reasons which included damage during WW2.
On 23rd December 1944 the tram service resumed from Nice to Pont-de-Peille with a bus service covering the remainder of the route to the North.
On 17th January 1945, goods transport between Contes and Nice resumed and, on 20th January 1945, passenger trams returned to Contes.
In the winter of 1948-1949 bad weather saw the interruption of services North of La Pointe de Contes.
January 1950 saw the closure of the line to passenger services with buses used to replace that service on a permanent basis. In May 1950, the goods service was also closed permanently.
The line to Bendejun followed the left bank of the River Paillon between the centre of Nice and its terminus in Bendejun. Its terminus in Nice was at the Northwest corner of Place Garibaldi, where a wooden kiosk served as its station building. It used the same tracks as the urban services through Abattoirs to La Trinité-Victor.
For a short distance trams ran on the verge of Route Nationale No. 204. Stops at Roma and Random (which had a passing loop) were followed by the stop in the village of Drap which was adjacent to the bridge to Cantaron.
The Route Nationale in Drap. Tram tracks can be seen in the centre of the road. This old postcard view was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Alain Nissim on 18th May 2022. [4]Drap again, this image shows La Place des Ecoles and the Route Nationale. A tram can be seen on the road at the extreme right of the picture. This old postcard view was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Alain Nissim on 18th May 2022. [4]La Place des Ecoles viewed from almost the same location as in the monochrome postcard image above. In the 21st century the Plane trees have gone and cars have taken over from the park that made up much of the square. [Google Streetview, November 2022]Turning just a little to the right and wandering a little further along the Route Nationale, this image shows the passing loop at the tram stop in Drap. It was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Jean-Paul Bascoul on 22nd February 2019, and comes from his private collection. [5] The same photograph appears in José Banaudo’s book. [1: p68]Approximately the same location as seen in the 21st century. The school on the left has seen its roof raised by the addition of another floor. [Google Streetview, November 2022]
It appears that as late as 1955, the tram track was visible in the road surface in the centre of Drap. The two parallel images from the IGN website show it present on Avenue de General de Gaulle when the map on the left was surveyed in 1955.
The Place des Ecoles in the centre of Drap. The ‘cross’ on the older map on the left is superimposed over the line of the tramway which was in the centre of the road. [11]A little further North the tramway can be seen leaving the centre of the road in the 1955 map extract. Presumably it ran along the verge between the road and the River Paillon. It might already have been lifted by 1955. The map is of little help with establishing its presence immediately North of this location. [12]
Leaving the centre of Drap, trams then passed under the PLM line between Nice and Cuneo for the third time at Pont des Vernes which also spanned the River Paillon. Trams ran between the river and the road.
Pont des Vernes in the 21st century. What was the old Route Nationale still passes under the most Easterly span of the truss girder viaduct which also spans the River Paillon. [Google Streetview, 2011]
The confluence of two arms of the River Paillon lay shortly beyond the railway bridge (Paillon de Contes and Paillon de L’Escarène). The Paillon de L’Escarène flowed in from the Southeast from the heights of Peillon, L’Escarène and Lucéram. It was spanned by a five-arched viaduct, some 140 metres in length which carried both the Route Nationale and the tramway. The construction of the bridge was started in the last years of the 18th century. While the bridge may well have been completed within a few years, the construction of the road of which it was a part, between Turin and Nice, was interrupted by conflict and was not completed until 1838. [1: p67]
A postcard view from the Southwest looking towards Pont de Peillon. The old road bridge (and its five arches) sits at the centre of the view. [7]A modern view looking Northeast along the D2204 where it crosses the Paillon de L’Escarene. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The same bridge, viewed from Chemin du Fontanil de Croves to the Southeast of the bridge. [Google Streetview, May 2019]This next extract from the parallel imagery provided by the IGN shows the tramway returning to the centre of the Route National as it crossed the bridge in 1955. It might be inferred from this that from Drap to this point it was still present on the West side of the highway. Again, however, the map extracts cannot be seen as conclusive proof of this. At the centre-top of the 1955 map extract the tramway appears to leave the road carriageway for a short distance for a tram stop and passing loop, which is mentioned in the text below. However Jose Banaudo has a photograph of the location in his book which seems to show the tramway remaining in the carriageway with an electricity substation just beyond it. [1: p69] There is now a roundabout at the junction between the road to Contes/Bendejun and the road East to La-Grave-de-Peille. [13]
Trams faced gradients on either side of the central arch of the bridge – 41mm/m and 34mm/m. Very soon after crossing the bridge in a northbound direction, trams encountered the stop at Pont-de-Peille, “where an electrical substation was located and from which the La-Grave-de-Peille line branched off to the east.” [1: p67]
A 21st century view North from the bridge. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The hamlet of La Pointe-de-Contes was beyond the North end of the bridge over the Paillon de L’Escarene. [3]
Beyond the hamlet of La Pointe-de-Contes, the line crossed the Ruisseau de la Garde (a tributary to Le Paillon de Contes) on a single-span bridge.
This next extract from the parallel mapping of the IGN shows the highway bridge over the Ruisseau de la Garde. The bridge sits in the bottom half of the two map extracts. The 1955 mapping appears to show tram tracks over the bridge at the centre line of the road. To the South of the bridge, it seems that the tramway was on the West verge of the road. North of the bridge it appears to switch to the East side verge of the carriageway. Only a short distance further North the tramway appears to cross back to the West side of the road. Road realignments in this area have resulted in a roundabout at the location of the old bridge. [14]The bridge over the Ruisseau de la Garde at La Pointe de Contes in 1953. The image was shared by Pierre Richert in the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 31st October 2017 [15]A similar view in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, April 2023.
Banaudo says that the road junction adjacent to the bridge was the point at which the L’Escarene tram line would have branched off the line to Contes. Work on that line wasn’t completed. [1: p67]
From this bridge, the line to Contes and Bendejun followed RN15 (now D15) North past the Lafarge lime and cement factory. “This, which was the main reason for the line’s existence, was served by two branches allowing the reception of fuel and the shipment of its products to Nice and its port.” [1: p67]
The location of the Lafarge factory. The 1955 map seems to show the tramway on the West side of the road. There also appear to be at least two sidings on the East side of the road. [15]An aerial image of the Lafarge Cement Works at Contes. The River Paillon de Contes is in the background. [10]
About a kilometre further North, the Contes station was located in the La Grave district adjacent to the footbridge leading to Châteauneuf.
Another extract from the parallel imagery provided by the IGN. The tramway can be seen, in the 1955 map extract on the left, following the verge of the road and immediately adjacent to the river channel. The bridge shown crossing The river at this point provided access to Chateauneuf which sat above the valley to the West. The tram stop was close to the bridge and a little to the Northwest of it. [17]
At Contes, the tramway had a small building and a siding by the river beneath the perched village.
Contes Gendarmerie and tram stop. This image was shared by Pierre Richert on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 30th October 2017 as part of an extensive album of postcard views of Contes. [3]A view from a similar position in the 21st century. The construction site is on the land once occupied by the Gendarmerie. [Google Streetview, April 2023]This image from the Jean-Henri Manara collection was colourised and shared by Demian West on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 13th December 2022. This original image was included in the comments attached to the colourised image on the Facebook group by Demian West. [16]A similar view in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The tram terminus at Contes. This postcard view was shared by Jean-Paul Bascoul on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 21st January 2017. It comes from the private collection of Jean-Paul Bascoul. [9]
From there, the line continued up the left bank of the Paillon. Banaudo tells us that there was only one further passing-loop which was in the district of Roccaya, near the Rémaurian footbridge. “The Bendéjun terminus was in the Moulins district, in a steep site where the road crosses the Paillon and definitively leaves the bottom of the valley to rise in bends towards this village and that of Coaraze.” [1: p67]
The Bendejun terminus of the tramway was in the valley floor close to the mills and alongside the river. There was a bridge just beyond the tram terminus which took the road over the Paillon de Contes and a series of hairpin bends lifted the road quickly up the valley side. This is another extract from the IGN parallel mapping. The map on the left was published in 1955. [18]The tram terminus at Bendejun, beyond this point the road turns sharply to the left to cross the river and then climbs through a series of hairpin bends to Bendejun and on to Coaraze. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Roland Coccoli on 30th May 2023. [19]A view from a little further South in the 21st century. The properties on either side of the road both remain. That on the East of the road now appears to be rendered. Of interest in this view are what appear to be tram rails in the right foreground. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
We have already noted that the tramway service North of Pont-de-Peille was frequently interrupted by landslides, subsidence and weather events. Banaudo also writes of significant problems with the trailers used for goods services which were often in poor condition or overloaded and as a result caused damage to the relatively light-weight rails of the tramway. [1: p71]
Pont de Peille to La Grave de Peille
Two branch-lines from the tramway to Contes were planned, the first was a line to La Grave de Peille. When built it had a total length of just short of 6.6 km. Its maximum gradient was 39 mm/m and only 360m of the route was on the level. The line ran from 112 m above sea-level to 195 m above sea-level at La Grave de Peille.
The concession for the operation of the line to La Grave de Peille was given to the TNL in June 1904. The line opened to passengers and freight on 12th June 1911. The route was numbered 28 on 1st January 1923 and saw construction traffic for the Nice-Cuneo Railway between 1923 and 1928. The cement works at La Grave was established in 1924.
At the end of 1926 the service was interrupted by a landslide. Work was undertaken between 1926 and 1927 to improve the electrical supply and September 1928 saw the official inauguration of the freight service associated with the cement works.
The Bridges and Roads Authority undertook paving work along the line in the winter of 1928-29. In August 1929, a landslide disrupted the service once again and a deviation was put in place.
On 8th October 1934, the line was renumbered, Ligne 38. The service was interrupted, once again, in November 1934. This time it was by a landslide at Châteauvieux.
The terminus in Nice was moved, along with that of the line to Contes and Bendejun, from Place Garibaldi to Rue Geoffredo in November 1935 and another landslide interrupted the service at Ste. Thecla between December 1935 and December 1936.
This tale of woe continued throughout the next decade with closures due to landslides, floods, the failure of bridges, or deterioration of trackwork. Banaudo provides a full list of these events. [1: p75]Such an unreliable service maintained at significant cost was of little use to users (passengers and goods). Closure became inevitable and it occurred on 1st April 1947.
The route started immediately to the North of the Pont de Peille stop on the line to Contes. Banaudo describes this connection as “une aiguille en rebroussement” (literally, ‘a turning needle’). [1: p72] In context, this appears to be a point which allowed access to the branch-line from the North. Trams from Nice would stop at Pont de Peille and then execute a reversal just to the North of the stop to gain access to the branch. This presumably involved a powered car running round its trailer at the tram stop and then reversing towards Contes. Banaudo provides one photograph of the manoeuvre taking place. [1: p72]
Such an unreliable service maintained at significant cost was of little use to users (passengers and goods). Closure became inevitable and it occurred on 1st April 1947.
The route between Pont de Peille and La Grave de Peille started immediately to the North of the Pont de Peille stop on the line to Contes. Banaudo describes this connection as “une aiguille en rebroussement” (literally, ‘a turning needle’). [1: p72] In context, this appears to be a point which allowed access to the branch-line from the North. Trams from Nice would stop at Pont de Peille and then execute a reversal just to the North of the stop to gain access to the branch. This presumably involved a powered car running round its trailer at the tram stop and then reversing towards Contes. Banaudo provides one photograph of the manoeuvre taking place. [1: p72]
The junction of the D21 and the D15 is shown on the right of these two parallel IGN images. The reverse curve, mentioned in the text about the tramway above, appears to be shown on the image on the left. The cross marks its location. The tramway appears to have run on the South side of the road.[20]The road to La-Grave-de-Peille and L’Escarene. Tge tramway ran along the verge of the old road or within the width of the carriageway over much of the journey to La-Grave-de-Peille. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
The branch-line followed the valley of the River Paillon de L’Escarène valley, a route also used by the PLM Nice-Cuneo line. Banaudo tells us that “the tram first took the right bank, sometimes on the shoulder and sometimes on the roadway of Route Nationale No. 21 (now departemental road No. 21). It passed through the hamlet of Borghéas, then entered the Châteauvieux gorge where a three-arch bridge brought the road and the track over to the left bank. After passing the pumping station of a spring which supplied part of the city of Nice with drinking water, trams reached the hamlet of Ste. Thecla.” [1: p72]
The location of the three-arched bridge which is mentioned by Banaudo in the quoted text above. [21]The same location as seen on Google Earth in 21st century. [Google Earth, 18th October 2022]A 21st century view, looking Northeast across the bridge carrying the D21 over the Paillon de L’Escarene. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The village of Ste. Thecle sits in the valley floor adjacent to the Paillon de l’Escarene. It hosts a railway station which is named Peillon-Ste. Thecle which serves the two villages. Paillon is high above, and to the East of the village of Thecle. [22]A view of Sainte Thecle, the mills and Peillon which shows the tramway alongside the road. The view looks Eastnortheast towards Paeillon. Note the kerb marking the limits of the highway. Peillon can be seen high above Ste. Thecle in this photograph. The River Paillon de l’Escarene is below the road and tramway to the left. This old postcard image was shared by Jean-Paul Bascoul on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 5th October 2023 and comes from the private collection of Jean-Paul Bascoul. The location of this photograph is difficult to confirm in 21st century. The relative positions of Peillon and the rock outcrops behind make it clear that the location is in Ste. Thecle but changes in the buildings in Ste.Thecle make ascertaining the location difficult. No doubt someone with local knowledge might be able to firm up the position of the camera! [6]The tram stop at Les Moulins de Peillon seems to be marked on the 1955 map extract on the left. However, it is worth noting Banaudo’s comments below which seem to suggest that the tramway was on the East side of the road. The tramway is perhaps marked by the single line on the East side of the road. The location is named on the modern map extract to the right. The valley has, by this time, turned to the North. Access to the village of Peillon is via the steep road with hairpin bends in the top right of each map extract. [23]The village of Peillon sits high above the valley floor. It is a car free mediaeval perched village. [24]
The next stop was in the valley closer to Peillon and set among the mills. This stop provided a passing loop, the only one on the line. Banaudo continues: “On the right, the picturesque village of Peillon stands at 376 m at the top of a rocky spur in a site worthy of a postcard. Immediately afterwards, the valley narrows once again and forms the narrow Bausset gorge where the tramway line was established over 567 m on its own site overlooking the road, finding it again to cross the Paillon on a single-arch bridge.” [1: p72]
These comments from Banaudo suggest that the line was on the East side of the road, perhaps indicated by the single black line on the 1955 map extract above which crosses the side road to Peillon only a few meters to the East of the main road. It seems that North of this point the tramway was very close to the road but held above it by a retaining wall. Road and tramway came together again at the next bridge over the Paillon de l’Escarene. That bridge is marked on both of the map extracts (1955 and 2023) above. The bridge used by the old road and tramway is marked in grey on the modern map.
Looking East off the modern road bridge, the single masonry arch of the old bridge can be seen in a collapsed state. A modern road realignment at this location removed some dangerous bends and improved traffic flow. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
Beyond this point, with the tramway and the D21 now on the West bank of the river, the valley opens out and the route of the old tramway passes through Novaines before reaching the location of its terminus at La Grave-de-Peille.
The tramway ran along the old Route Nationale No. 21 to La Grave de Peille. As the road turned to re-cross the River Paillon de L’Escarene, the tramway continued for only a short distance to serve a cement works on the West bank of the river. [25]The terminus of the passenger service at La Grave de Peille. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Roland Coccoli on 2nd December 2018. [8]
The terminus of the route was sited at the meeting point of the boundaries of three communes, Peillon, Peille and Blausasc, adjacent to a cement works which was operating from the mid-1920s and had its own branch-line from the tramway. The cement works became particularly significant in the life of the branch-line once the PLM opened its line between Nice and Cuneo in the late-1920s. Passengers deserted the trams as a much quicker journey to and from Nice was offered by the PLM from its two stations, Peillon-Ste. Thecle and Peille.
The railway station at Peille with the cement works visible in the distance on the right side of the image. This colourised monochrome postcard image was taken with the camera facing towards the Southwest. Trams ran along the valley from/to the lefthand edge of this image as far as the cement works. [26]
Banaudo highlights a particular problem with the line to La Grave de Peille. [1: p74] The tramway was built with minimal investment – just enough to reach its terminus. Rails were the lightest possible; the TNL used existing bridges not designed for the loads imposed by trams and trailers; road carriageway widths were decreased to provide space for the trams, (ather than setting the rails in the roads).
Local protests began as early as 1908, but issues becameore acute after the Great War because of the increased traffic on both the road and the tramway resulting from the construction of the Nice-Cuneo railway and the opening of the cement plant at La Grave. “Neither the road nor the railway were able to withstand this additional load. On 21st November 1928, the municipal council of Peillon reported that the Bausset bridge was in a lamentable state and, for lack of urgent measures, serious misfortunes occurred during the winter of 1928-29. Despite the protests of the TNL company which rightly feared for the sustainability of its rails, the Bridges and Roads Authority covered the rails with macadam to widen the roadway accessible to cars. What was predictable happened: insufficiently drained under this coating and tired by high tonnages, the rails were too weak and the already tired sleepers soon began to disintegrate.” [1: p74]
In 1937 proper maintenance was undertaken between Borghéas and Châteauvieux, “but the alarming state of the track, the insufficient electricity supply and the shortage of wagons led the TNL to provide its passenger service by bus” [1: p74] The cement factory also began to use road vehicles.
WW2 resulted in traffic (both goods and passengers) returning to the rails in the summer of 1940, but by the beginning of 1941 the track had deteriorated to such an extent that all tramway traffic had to be suspended.
Sufficient maintenance was undertaken to allow goods services to resume within a few weeks but the condition of the bridge at Bausset meant that the line North of the bridge could not be used by trams. Lime and cement, “went down by truck to the Peillon stop (Les Moulins), where it was transhipped on a train of two wagons limited to 6 km/h to Pont-de-Peille… The end-to-end service resumed on 7th July 1941, but it was again interrupted in September 1943 by the destruction of the Pont de Peille then at the end of August 1944 by that of the Pont de Bausset bridge.” [1: p74]
A temporary structure of steel beams and a wooden deck was quickly provided but “the track formed such tight curves on either side of the structure that derailments were not rare.” [1: p74]
Early 1945 saw the reintroduction of passenger and freight services but the following winter saw heavy flooding which destabilised the temporary bridge at Bausset and the line was again closed, this time for two and a half months. Ultimately the increasingly erratic service on the line resulted in its final closure in the spring of 1947.
La Pointe de Contes to l’Escarene
Sadly, this line was never used in earnest. Much was done to create the line but circumstances combined to mean the work done did not come to fruition. Initially, l’Escarene was chosen as the final destination for the tramway from Pont de Peille via La Grave de Peille in 1904. The concession for the line between La Grave and L’Escarene was awarded on 26th June 1904, but it was rescinded early in 1906.
Banaudo tells us that, “after several decades of procrastination, the construction of a Nice-Cuneo railway line had been approved by an international convention, granted to the PLM and made public. As the route of this line was established by the Paillon de L’Escarène valley which the tramway should have taken.” [1: p76]
The result of that decision was the truncation of the route from Pont de Peille to La Grave de Peille and L’Escarène at La Grave.
Banaudo goes on to explain that “the idea of connecting L’Escarène to the tram network was not abandoned, especially since some were still considering extending a line as far as Luceram and even Peirs Cava, at an altitude of 1400 m.” [1: p76]
In 1910 the Bridges and Roads Authority commenced discussions with the TNL. The steep Gradients likely to be required saw the TNL propose an option of a rack system.
It was not until 1913 that the route from La Pointe de Contes was confirmed. Work began in January 1914. The Great War saw work come to a standstill.
It was 1919, before rearranged contracts saw work recommence on the line. Ok about was in short supply and priority was given to the construction of the PLM line between Nice and Cuneo. In the end, the Departement suspended work on the line in 1926 because costs of materials had risen dramatically.
In 1928, Banaudo tells us, “at the request of the municipality of Blausan, the general council took the decision to develop the length of the tramway formation which was remote from the existing road, from Fuont-de-Jarrier to the Col de Nice which became the departmental road 321.” [1: p76] The planned tramway to L’Escarène was finally abandoned/decommissioned on 29th June 1933.
Had it been built, the total length of the tramway would have been just under 7.6 km with a maximum gradient of 55mm/m. It would have risen from a height of 131m above sea-level at La Pointe de Contes to around 410 m above sea-level at the Col de Nice.
The route was to have been served entirely by a single-track tramway leaving the line to Contes at La Pointe de Contes.
The red line shown on these map extracts provided by the IGN shows the route of the planned tramway as it left the route to Contes and Bendejun. A road now follows that line and appears on the modern mapping on the right. The road is named ‘Chemin du Tram’. The main road towards L’ Escarène leaves both extracts at the top right. [27]Looking North along the main road towards Contes. Behind the camera the road to L’Escarène heads away to the East. The tram stop for La Pointe de Contes was along this length of road. Just to the North of the tram stop was the point where the tramway to L’Escarène would have set off to the East. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The tramway to Contes and Bendejun ran ahead along what is now the D15. The route to L’Escarène would have run off to the right at what is now a road junction. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The route of the planned tramway followed what is now called ‘Chemin du Tram’ which runs directly ahead of the camera. It is the road to the left of the trees at the centre of this image. [Google Streetview, March 2023]A little further East along what would have been the route of the tramway. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The planned route ran to the right of the retaining wall before joining the D2204. [Google Streetview, March 2023]Looking back towards the D15 from the D2204. The tram route followed the retaining wall running away from the camera on the right side of the photograph, and then curved round between the two buildings seen beyond the parked vehicles. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
Initially, it would have followed the Route Nationale No. 204 (now the D2204) up the valley of the Ruisseau de la Garde.
Parallel map extracts, once again, provided by the IGN. The main features, which can be seen on both the 1955 extract and the 21st century extract, are the bridges which carried the road over the Ruisseau de la Garde. [28]The location of the first of the two bridges. There is little at road level to indicate that it is crossing the stream which passes some metres below the road. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The location of the second bridge is easier to make out. The modern road has been straightened and a new bridge constructed. The old road which would have been followed by the tramway bears away to the left with the new bridge directly ahead. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The view from the new bridge across the Ruisseau de la Garde of the old road. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The view Southwest along the D2204 in the 21st century. The old road can be seen on the right of the picture. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Further Northeast on the D2204 the verge of which would have carried the proposed tramway. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Again, further Northeast on the D2204 the verge of which would have carried the proposed tramway. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
At the hamlet of La Fuont-de-Jarrier, the tramway left the road and the valley to embark on a dedicated length of almost 4 km. Banaudo tells us that the route ran through “a landscape of arid hills where only pines managed to grow on ridges of gray marl. The only locality encountered was the village of Blausasc, below which a stopping point was to be established. The line continued northwards, passing through a small tunnel at a place called La Blancarde, to join the road approaching the Col de Nice.” [1: p76]
La Fuont-de-Jarrier was the point at which the proposed tramway diverted from the highway. The formation intended for the tramway became the base for the new CD 321. The new road is that shown leaving the established road to the right on the 1955 IGN map extract. [29]The junction between the D2204 and the CD321 in the 21st century. The CD321 follows the formation of the intended tramway to L’Escarène. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The next length of the CD321. [30]Over the first few kilometres, the carriageway was wide enough for two full lanes of traffic. [Google Streetview, March 2023]A further length of the CD321 with Blausasc above the road to the East. [31]The CD321 continues to follow the planned route of the tramway. This rock cutting was cut for the tramway. The location is at the bottom of the twin maps above. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The tramway route (CD321) runs ahead and bears to the right. The road which crosses the route at this location is the D221. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The red line marks the route of the CD321 which is built on the formation of the proposed tramway. The road crossing it at the staggered junction seen here is the D221 which linked Blausasc to the Route de la Col de Nice. [Google Earth, December 2023]Looking North-northwest along the CD321 towards the top of the twin map extracts above. [Google Streetview, March 2023]This next set of two parallel map extracts from the IGN show the Route de la Col de Nice marked by two heavy bold lines and the CD321 above it to the East. [32]
This next sequence of photographs show the road (CD321) running from the bottom of the twin extracts above towards the tunnel which can just about be picked out on the modern map extract above.
This sequence of four images shows the CD321 in the 21st century. Over this length, no attempt to widen the formation built for the intended tramway has been made. Retaining walls, where they exist, will most probably be those constructed by the contractors developing the tramway route. [Google Streetview, March 2023]An enlarged dual map extract of the area at the top-left of the last twin map extracts from the IGN. Both this, and the last pair of extracts show, on the right-hand, modern extract, the tunnel bored for, but never used by, the planned tramway which is, however, now used by the CD 321 in the 21st century. [34]
This next sequence of three photographs show the CD321 in the vicinity of the tunnel built for the planned tramway.
These three photographs show the Route de Blausasc (the CD321) passing through the old tramway tunnel. [Google Streetview, March 2023]Another set of twin map extracts from 1955 and the 21st century provided by the IGN. This pair of images provides the reason for the separation of the planned tramway route from the older Route de la Col de Nice. The hairpin-bends shown centre left on each of the images meant that the road would have been completely unsuitable for use by trams. Track curvature and gradient would have been insurmountable obstacles. To the North of the hairpin-bends, both routes converge. [33]The Col de Nice was the high point in the proposed tramway. The Route de la Col de Nice and the planned tramway met just to the South of the Col de Nice. [35]
North of the tramway tunnel, the last kilometre or so of the CD321 and hence the last length of the independent tramway formation required the construction of a series of retaining walls. These next few photographs illustrate the size of the task undertaken by the contractors in the early 20th century. The four photos follow the Route de Blausasc North towards its junction with the Route de la Col de Nice.
These four photos follow the CD321 North, each shows the size of the retaining structures built for the tramway. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
A few hundred metres before its junction with the D2204, the CD321 runs parallel to it with the two roads gradually reaching the same height above sea level.
The D2204 and the CD321 run parallel with no more than a few metres height difference. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The planned tramway, now the Route de Blausasc (CD321) meets the D2204 just short of the Col de Nice. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The Col de Nice in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
Banaudo talks of the tramway running in a cutting below and to the right of the road and then reaching L’Escarène at the end of a steep descent. [1: p76]
This final example of the parallel imagery provided by the IGN shows the D2204 (Rue de Chateau) running down into L’Escarène.
In the first instance, the tramway would have been within the width of the modern highway, but as shown below it did run below and to the right of the road on its way down into L’Escarène.
The view along Rue du Chateau, L’Escarène from the Col de Nice. The tramway formation ran on the right side of the road. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Heading down into L’Escarène evidence can be seen of the prepared tramway route to the right of, and just below, the highway. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The separated tramway route, metalled, runs to the right of, and below, the Rue du Chateau much of the way down into the centre of L’Escarène. [Google Streetview, March 2023]Closing in on the centre of L’Escarène, the proper tramway would have been within the width of the modern highway. [Google Streetview, March 2023]
I have not been able to establish the location in L’Escarène planned for the terminus of the tramway.
This article completes a series of articles about the early 20th century metre-gauge tramways and railways of Nice and its hinterland. Perhaps the next series of articles centred on Nice will look at the standard-gauge line between Nice and Cuneo? ……
References
Jose Banaudo; Nice au fil du Tram: Volume 2: Les Hommes et Les Techniques; Les Editions du Cabri, 2005.
The TNL (Tramways de Nice et du Littoral) had four lines which ran some distance inland from the coast. Three ran out from Nice, serving: Levens, Bendejun, and La-Grave-de-Peille. All followed valleys of the Paillon and its tributaries. As well as the line to La-Grave-de-Peille, the line to Contes and Bendejun was to have had another Branch to l’Escarene. Major work was undertaken on that line but it was never brought into use.
The fourth significant line operated by the TNL ran from Menton to Sospel. This line required some significant feats of engineering. The featured image above (public domain) shows one of the structures on this line.
You will find earlier articles about two of these lines on this website. They can be found by following these links:
Levens
Two earlier articles, the second of which involves some flights of fancy on my part – looking at a possible alternative routes for the tramway. As we will see below, those thoughts are not without merit given the discussions which took place around the best way for the tram network to serve Levens village.
Bendejun and La-Grave-de-Peille will be covered in a future article. This article focusses on updating earlier articles about the tramways between Nice and Levens, and between Menton and Sospel. ……
Further notes on the Nice to Levens Tramway
The full length of the line from Place Masséna to Levens was just over 23 km of which a little less than 6km were part of Nice’s urban network (between Place Masséna and St. André).
Apart from the articles mentioned above, the first 6 km are covered in another, recent article (which also covers a number of lines which were part of Nice’s urban network), and can be read by following this link:
These new notes are based around a section of José Banaudo’s French text: ‘Nice au fils de Tram, Volume 2: Les Hommes, Les Techniques‘ [1] Direct quotes are referenced.
In the main, the length of the line covered here is that from St. André to Levens (as built), and a section just over 1km in length which would have served the centre of Levens, Levens-Village but which was not completed because of the advent of WW1.
There was, however, a short length of tramway used by the Levens trams which did not follow the route of the urban trams to St. André. This detour followed the left bank of the River Paillon through Place Garibaldi, Rue de la République then Rue Barla and the Barla bridge, before rejoining the urban line of St. André on the right bank.
In addition, we need to note the significant impact of bad weather in the construction of the line in the area now known as ‘Pasteur’. Banaudo speaks of very significant storms during the winter 1907-1908. In particular, storms occurred on: 29th September; 3rd, 15th and 30th October; 3rd November; 10th and 27th December. Eventually work could recommence on 20th January and was finished on 27th March. Banaudo comments that “The additional work and necessary consolidations of the Paillon embankment ultimately increased the cost of the first construction contract for the Nice – Levens line by a third, compared to initial forecasts.” [1: p66]
Banaudo tells us that the maximum gradient on the whole line was 63mm/m and that less than 2 km of the line were level, having no gradient. At Place Masséna the line was only 9 metres above sea level, at Levens it reached 538 metres above sea level. [1: p62]
The St. André tram stop was the terminus of urban services. Banaudo tells us that “Beyond St. André, the tramway went up the valley of the Banquière or Gahre, right bank tributary of Paillon. It passed several caves and two mills nestled at the bottom of deep gorges between the heights of Falicon and L’Ahadie. Upstream of the Tinon bridge, the pass became so narrow that the tramway, hitherto on the shoulder, had to be embedded in the roadway with which it crossed the valley on several occasions. After the place called Les Clues, the valley widened a little and a tram stop served the hamlet of Moulin-de-Tourrette.” [1: p62]
Les Gorges de St. André de la Roche looking South towards Nice. The tramway can be seen on the right of the road. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Roland Coccoli on 26th September 2023. [6]The tight Gorges de St. André looking towards Tourrette-Levens. The tramway is on the left of the road. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Alain Nissim on 3rd October 2022. [7]
From this point trams followed their own route a little removed from the main road for about 3 km, “punctuated by the curved Rio-Sec Viaduct and a short tunnel. The route overlooked the road, moved away from it, then finally rejoined it at the foot of the old village of Tourrette-Levens, renowned for its ancient castle. This locality, the most important encountered on the route. was served by a station established in the Quartier du Plan,” [1: p62] at the foot of the road serving the old village.
As noted above, a sequence of photographs of this separated tram route can be found here. [5]
Beyond Tourrette Levens, trams continued to climb through the Western slopes of the Mont Ferion range, “the line encountered two other passing places: at a place called Lava where a siding allowed wood to be loaded, and at the hamlet of Ste. Claire. The highest point of the line was reached on the plateau which forms the Grands Prés de Levens where festivals, sporting events and horse races are organized. The Levens terminus was located at a place called Les Traverses, where a wooden building housed a buffet enjoyed by travellers before the final climb on foot” [1: p62] to the village of Levens which is perched on a hillock at an altitude of 570 m above sea-level. “A superb site with both a Mediterranean and alpine appearance with the high peaks of the Vésubie valley in the background. In order to get closer to the center, a steep ramp extension including a curved line on its own site was undertaken to reach the current Lov Roux esplanade at the entrance to the village. Unfortunately, the war interrupted the work and this extension was never put into service.” [1: p62] Some further notes about the planned extension can be found after the review of key structures on the route.
Structures on the route included:
A. the Garibaldi and Barla bridges over the River Paillon (each made up of three cast iron arches);
This anonymous photograph (perhaps by Jean Walburg de Bray, 1839-1901), shows the Garibaldi Bridge and the right bank of the River Paillon. The view looks from southeast to northwest and is dated 1877. [2]
Three views of Pont Barla over the River Paillon in Nice, one even has a tram travelling over it! [3]
15th April 1912 – the line from Villa Caserta to Sospel was opened to passengers and the short branch to the PLM Station in Menton was closed.
B. the Tinon, Falicon and Clues bridges over the River Banquière (each a single masonry arch);
This extract from Google Maps shows the length of the M19 (Route de Levens) as it appears in November 2023. This area has experienced what might be termed some ‘remodeling’ as the quarrying works have expanded. The numbers superimposed on the satellite image are: 1: the location of an old road bridge across the River Banquière which also carried the tramway, referred to by José Banaudo as the bridge at Falicon; 2: the location of another old bridge spanning the river which, I believe, is that referred to by Banaudo as the bridge at Les Cles; 3: the present route of the M19 which appears to have once been the line of the old tramway; the line of the M19 before quarrying work expanded. The locations ‘1’ and ‘2’ are down in more detail below. The routes of the M19 denoted ‘3’ and ‘4’ are further illustrated by the map immediately below. [Google Maps, November 2023]An extract from the mapping of http://www.mapsof.net. Location ‘1’ on the satellite image is bottom-right in this image. A narrow older road is shown and the bridge over the Banquière is hidden by the symbol for the Grottoes de Saint Andre de la Roche. The old tram route then followed the north bank of the river along the route indicated by grey/white dashes. It appears that the M19 ran to the North of this as shown and rejoined the valley of the river via two hairpin bends. The second bridge is at the top-left under the ‘M19’ indicator. [4]A closer view on Google Maps of the location of the Falicon Bridge Location ‘1’ above. The new road bridge can easily be made out. The older bridge sits to the right of the Route de Levens close to the word ‘Services’. [Google Maps, November 2023]Looking Southeast from the abutment of the new bridge at the location of the old structure. [Google Streetview, November 2022]This is location ‘2’ above. One of the hairpin bends on the older M19 stands guard over the arch bridge which carried the older road over the River Banquière. The modern bridge is to its left. I think this is the bridge referred to by Banaudo as the bridge at Les Cles. [Google Maps, November 2023]Looking from the hairpin bend in the image above across the old arch bridge. [Google Streetview, October 2022]The next section of the M19 heading North. It crosses the River Banquière close to ‘A’ at the bottom of this extract from Google Maps, and again at D’. At location ‘A’ there is an older bridge across the Banquière which is probably the bridge referred to by Banaudo as the Tinon Bridge. This location is shown below.
Banaudo tells us that the tramway was remote from the main road on its own formation over this length for around 3 km “punctuated by the curved Rio-Sec Viaduct and a short tunnel.” [1: p62] That length of tramway commences at ‘C’ and continues through ‘E’ and onwards to Tourette-Levens. Some details of that length appear below but a fuller series of photographs can be found at https://rogerfarnworth.com/2018/03/20/the-nice-to-levens-tramway-part-1-chemins-de-fer-de-provence-54.Location ‘A’ showing the modern M19 and the older road bridge over the Banquière. [Google Streetview, April 2023]At location ‘C’ the tramway separated from the road and followed its own route to ‘E’. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Looking South at ‘E’ the old tramway rejoined the M19 but only for a very short distance. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
C. the Rio-Sec Viaduct (a single curved masonry arch) and the Moulins tunnel (40 m) which were on an independent formation a short distance to the East of the M19;
The Rio-Sec Viaduct curves round the East side of the area marked ‘P’ for Parking. The Tunnel des Moulins is the shaded length of road to the North of the parking area. [Google Maps, 2018]Almost as soon as trams began running alongside the road again, they separated onto their own route once more. This dedicated formation took trams over the Viaduc de Rio-Sec and through the Moulins tunnel. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The Rio-Sec Viaduct, seen from the East. [Google Streetview, 2018The Tramway formation over the Rio-Sec Viaduct. [Google Streetview]The approach to the Moulins tunnel over the Rio-Sec Viaduct. [Google Streetview, 2018]The Moulins Tunnel South portal. [Google Streetview, 2018]
D. the Levens tunnel (95 m, on the section built but not opened and now in use as a vehicular route into the centre of the village).
Some further observations ……..
Banaudo tells us that the process of agreeing the TNL tramway route serving Levens was different than for other routes (which were primarily dictated by the terrain and the orientation of the valleys). Early studies led to some elected officials recommending “linking Nice to St. Martin-Vésubie via the traditional stagecoach route via Tourrette, Levens, Duranus and St. Jean-la-Rivière.” [1: p66] When the project took shape in 1904, three routes were considered:
One extended the Cimiez line in the direction of Rimiez, L’Aire St. Michel, and Gairaut, from where it skirted the Mont Chauve massif to the west to serve the hilltop villages of Aspremont, Castagniers and St. Blaise, before arriving at Levens. This extremely picturesque cornice route would have served a well-populated area, but the travel time to Levens would have been prohibitive.
Another left the Paillon valley in St. André and climbed in switchbacks to the village of Falicon, then it joined the previous route in Gairaut. This route would have been even longer and more tortuous!
The last also left from St. André, but it went up the Gorges de la Banquière towards Tourrette, Ste. Claire and Levens. It served a smaller population than the previous ones, but had the advantage of being more direct route.
The third option was chosen and built between 1907 and 1909!
Banaudo continues to explain that the Compagnie du Sud [which ran the TAM tram network] applied for the concession of the Nice – Levens line, in the hope that, should an extension from Levens to St. Jean-la-Rivière be built it would connect with its own line in the Vésubie valley. But the chief engineer of bridges and roads decided to allocate the route to the TNL. His decision meant that the usage figures for the TNL network were reduced by this lightly populated route and as a result greater the line attracted greater subsidies from the State. [1: p66]
After the completion of construction in 1909, the commune of Levens lobbied for an extension into the village. Banaudo tells us that a route had already been considered by the Bridges and Roads Department which took the form of a long loop to keep gradients as low as possible. Initially a sizeable cutting was proposed which ultimately was superseded by a tunnel. [1: p66]
A contract was awarded and work started early in 1914. Work continued through to 1916-1917 slowed by the shortage of labour during the War. After the war, work restarted but disagreements over the financing of station facilities held up the works. Finally, the general council decided in 1926 to postpone the completion of the line and then, in 1929, proposed converting the route into a motorable road. It is in use as a road under traffic-light control in the 21st century. [1: p66]
Further notes on the Menton to Sospel line
Banaudo tells us that the total length of this line was close to 17.4 km of which the TNL saw the length from Place St. Roch along Rue Partouneaux to Villa-Caserta (2.4 km) and the short stub to Menton Railway Station (0.15 km) as part of its coastal network. The remaining length from Villa Caserta to Sospel (14.9 km) was deemed part of their departmental network. [1: p77]
This Baedeker map of Menton in the early 20th century (1902) has been annotated to show tram routes in red. The line from Monaco to Menton ran along Avenue Carno and Avenue Felix Faure. At Place St. Roch the line to Sospel left the coastal route and ran along Rue Partouneaux as far as Avenue de la Gare and then Northwest alongside the River Carei. A short branch left the line to serve the Railway Station, but was only in use for a few years. [21]
The line originated in Place Saint Roch and ran first along Rue Partouneaux.
Avenue Felix-Faure/Place St. Roch, Menton, looking Northeast. On the left we can see the waiting kiosk of the TNL tram urban lines. There is a tram waiting at the stop which will leave along Rue Partouneaux to the Careï valley which exits the photograph to the left. It will possibly stop at the Villa Caserta terminus, or it will continue towards Monti, Castllon, the valley of Bévéra and the Sospel terminus. This image was shared by Jean-Paul Bascul on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 28th September 2023 (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [15]Looking into Rur Partouneaux from Place St. Roch. The Hotel des Postes is visible at the first junction down Rue Partouneaux. Note that it has an extra storey in the modern image. [Google Streetview, April 2023] This view is surprisingly similar to an early 20th century view which can be found on the Maonaco4Ever Facebook page on this link: https://www.facebook.com/MentonDuPasseAuPresent/photos/a.635924896587645/904791879700944/?__cft__[0]=AZX5F8XW__jQPAyygfwvR03xmeAlwW_69beRs7RwlwE6xsjQfZ63F76O9fVpVPdM1BJs7Sko4cCH399fbkWwRbZM3L9NxeGF889CfcQ1_7n1krmUaygG3KAdo2h7ZHbuHUUryowX6X5bDwpFxz0OAGE5IBIgQ4UTuX_U-hOLi7R9JLmGRwSgl8bz-28sshkfnjk&__tn__=EH-R . [20]The view from close to Place St. Roch along Rue Partouneaux. The Hotel des Postes et Telegraphes is seen on the corner of the next junction. A tram travelling towards Les Jardins Biovès is seen immediately outside the building. [17]A similar view in April 2023. The building has the additional storey noted above. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Further Northwest along Rue Partouneaux. This old postcard view shows the road as it runs toward Les Jardins Biovès. The trees on the right of the road were Orange Trees. [18]This is the same location in the 21st century. Rue Partouneaux runs towards what were Les Jardins Biovès. [Google Streetview, October 2022]A tram leaving Rue Partnouneaux and about to turn North alongside Les Jardins Biovès. [19: p5]The same location in the 21st century. Rue Partouneaux is directly ahead of the camera. The old tramway curved round to the North. Its route approximated to the curved line of bollards. [Google Streetview, March 2023]
The maximum gradient on the line was 68mm/m, only 0.144 km of the line was on a level formation. The line started in Place St. Roch at 3 metres above sea level and reached a maximum altitude of 572 metres above sea level at the Castillon tunnel. In all, trams had to negotiate 482 curves as they travelled the line of which 143 had a radius less than 40m. [1: p77]
Over 75% of the route was independent of the road between Menton and Sospel, now the D2566/D2566A. With its tight curves, “its imposing structures and its stations with spacious buildings, the Menton – Sospel line appeared much like a real mountain railway. In this way, it was more similar to the daring branches of the TAM network than to the other TNL lines in the Nice hinterland which retained the appearance of urban tramways.” [1: p77]
Banaudo tells us that “the line was entirely single track. It met the coastal artery at a triangular connection on Place St. Roch, at the entrance to the old town of Menton. The tram left from the western branch of the triangle, along which a wooden kiosk housed travelers and company agents. Via Rue Partouneaux, trams accessed the Biovès public garden which occupies an esplanade created by covering the River Careï. At the top of Avenue de la Gare (today Verdun) there was a short branch of 147 m on a ramp of 40 mm/m which ended in a dead end at the entrance to the courtyard of Menton PLM station. [That branch] served as a terminus for urban shuttles from Place St. Roch.” [1: p77] The branch lineline was brief both in length and life since, “after only operating from 1903 to 1912, it was abandoned during the First World War.” [1: p77]
Immediately beyond the station branch, the tramway passed under the bridge of the PLM Nice – Ventimiglia line then continued up the right bank of the River Careï where there was a goods station. Banaudo says that, “the line passed at the foot of the L’Annonciade Hill, where a funicular served a hotel and a monastery.” [1: p77]
The Funiculaire de L’Annonciate served a hotel and Monetary at the summit of L’Annonciade Hill in 1919. The funicular railway opened in 1914 and closed circa. 1939. [8]
Continuing North, three passing-loops were provided at “Villa-Beau-Séjour, at the Gioan-Bosio property Ans at l’Octroi-due Careï. Soon after, “the Villa-Caserta tram stop marked the terminus of urban services. Upstream and downstream of this point, two dedicated branch lines allowed the Mercier and Gianotti companies to load materials to be sent to Sospel for the construction of the PLM Nice – Cuneo line.” [1: p77]
The route continued North along what is now the D2566 avoiding one tight bend by following its own course for approximately 450 metres. The hamlet of Monti had its own tram stop and was the location of a reinforced concrete viaduct which spanned both a ravine and the road. Pictures of this structure can be seen further down this article.
The tramstop and passing loop at Monti. [16]A similar location in 2023. Both views look South from a point just to the South of Viaduc de Monti. [Google Streetview, March 2023]
Now running on its own formation, the tramway climbed above the road for 2.3 km. Banaudo explains that the road climbed to meet the tramway “at the Ubac-Foran forest house. Arriving at a point where the valley narrows sharply and where the gradient becomes steeper, the track ran again on its own formation to span the road and the River Careï on the curved Careï viaduct, with five masonry arches.” [1:p77]
Over the River Careï the tramway continued climbing steeply in a Southeasterly direction to the location of the Caramel viaduct, “whose bold silhouette had already been visible for several minutes standing out against the mountainside. This major [structure] on the line had thirteen arches with a total length of 120 m, which were part of an omega-shaped loop below the road.” [1: p77] To the Northwest of the Viaduct, two dead-end tracks were provided, one to serve a quarry, the other to stop trams whose brakes had failed before they ran out onto the viaduct.
Continuing its ascent, the tramway again left the road and approached the bottom of the valley where the Castillon tram stop was located. “It was in a damp and isolated site below the village and the pass of the same name. A substation incorporated into the station building provided the line’s electrical supply. This was also the location of the southern portal of the 763 m tunnel under the Col de Castillon, the longest structure of this type drilled for a tramway in the Alpes-Maritimes.” [1: p77]
At its Northern portal, the tunnel opened into the green valley of Merlanson at an altitude of 572 m, the highest point on the TNL network. “From there, the line descended on its own formation for 4900 m on the right bank of the river. To the west stands Mount Barbonnet crowned with a fort while in the background, at the foot of the amphitheater formed by the mountains of the Authion massif, the Bévéra valley widens to form the basin where the town of Sospel is located.” [1: p77]
Approaching Sospel, the tramway ran under the embankment of the PLM Nice – Cuneo line then ended its journey at the entrance to the town where a station was built with a passenger and goods facilities and a motor shed. Banaudo tells us that during the years of construction of the PLM railway, “the track extended to the platform of the future PLM station, where the materials could be supplied by the Mercier and Gianotti companies.” [1:p77]
Sospel showing the tram stop/station centre-left and the PLM station top-right. This is an enlarged part of a photograph taken after the completion of the construction of the PLM railway line. It was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 15th March 2017 by Pierre Richert. [12]Sospel tram station. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Roland Ciccoli on 11th September 2017. [13]TNL Tram No. 13 is heavily laden with bags of cement and in charge of a long load affixed to two short, flat wagons. The photograph is taken close to Sospel with the works underway on the PLM Nice to Cuneo line. [19: p6]
Key Dates
Banaudo provides details of dates relating to the life of the whole line. [1: p78] The more significant of these are: 1903 (the line between Place St. Roch and the PLM Railway Station was opened to traffic); 1911 (the route between Avenue de la Gare, Menton and Villa Caserta was opened); 1912 (a courier service between Menton and Sospel was opened); 1913 (the goods service between Menton and Sospel was inaugurated); 1923 (the new numbering system was put in place: No. 45 was given to the urban service between Menton and Villa Caserta; No. 46 TP the interurban service Menton to Sospel); 1927 (the urban service (No. 45) was extended to Route-de-Monti); 1931 (trams on Ligne No. 46 were replaced by buses and the tram service (Ligne No. 45) between Villa Caserta and Route de Monti ceased); January 1932 (trams on Ligne No 45 between Avenue de la Gare and Villa Caserta were replaced by a bus service); March 1932 (the remaining length of the line between Place St. Roch and Avenue de la Gare was closed). In the summer of 1933 the full length of the line was decommissioned.
The full service between Menton and Sospel was active for less than 20 years!
The Main Structures on the Line
These were: the Peïrola Ravine Bridge; the Monti Viaduct (1 concrete arch of 36 m, total length 79 m); the Ture Ravine bridge; the Pian Ravine Bridge; the Careï Viaduct (5 arches of 8 m); the Caramel viaduct (13 arches of 8 m, length 120 m); and the Castillon Tunnel (763 m).
Structurae.net provides a number of photographs of the Viaduc de Monti which remains standing in the 21st century. These images can be found here. [9]
Viaduc de Monti in the early 20th century, probably 1910. [10] Banaudo tells us that this was chosen from five design submissions. The structure was designed by François Hennebique was selected in 1907 by the deputy chief engineer Amaud who judged it to be the most economical (38,000 francs), the most advantageous and the most satisfactory in appearance. [1: p81]The Viaduc du Monti again. One of the very few times that steam was seen on TNL lines. We see the same consist at Viaduc du Caramel a little further down this article. [19: p7]A tram crosses Viaduc de Careï having run down the gradient from the Viaduct du Caramel which can be seen in the distance. The tramway can be seen running below the road on the left of this image.Viaduc de Careï seen from the hillside to the South. In the 21st century the viaduct looks very different as the D2566 has been widened and realigned. [11]A photograph from a similar location showing the way in which the valley has been remodelled, realigning and lifting the road, so that the piers of the viaduct seem much shorter. [Google Streetview, April 2023]This is an evocative photograph which pictures a small steam engine travelling up the Menton to Sospel tramway. The location is the Viaduc du Caramel and the photo is taken from the carriageway of what will become the D2566. The 0-6-0T locomotive is in-steam but the tram (TNL No. 13, which we have seen in an image earlier in this article) also has it supply pole raised and in contact with the overhead lines. It is positioned behind the locomotive presumably to give some tractive effort and perhaps also as a fail-safe needed because of the gradient of the line. The locomotive is being moved to work on the PLM railway line between Nice and Cuneo (Nice – Sospel – Breil-sur-Roya – Cuneo). [19: p4]A view of the Viaduc du Caramel in March 2023, taken from a similar position as the monochrome image above. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The approach to the Castillon Tunnel from the South in around 1920 with a tram heading for Menton. The hamlet of Castillon sits more than 130 metres above the tram stop. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 6th August 2021 by Alain Nissim. [14]A modern view of the old tramway tunnel. The original bore is on the right. The new bore is on the left. The modern road is the D2566A which follows the line of the old tramway. The works underway in March 2023 were still being undertaken in November 2023 when we followed the route by car on the way from Sospel to Nice. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The southern portal of Tunnel de Castillon (public domain). [22]A closer view of the southern portal of the old tunnel in 2023. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The northern portals of the two tunnels in 2023. [Google Streetview, March 2023.
The Tunnel de Castillon was an essential element of the scheme, the additional climb to the village would have required a significant series of loops either side of the pass and severe gradients. Structurae.net provides a number of photographs of the Tunnel which remains standing in the 21st century and is in use as a road tunnel. These images can be found here. [24]
Steep Gradients on the Menton to Sospel Tramwayand the wider tram network
Banaudo’s book has a short feature relating to the exceptional gradients on the Menton to Sospel line and throughout the TNL and TAM networks. [1: p81]
99% of the Monton to Sospel tramway was on a gradient. The average gradient between Menton and the summit of the line at the North end of the Tunnel de Castillon was 46mm/m over almost 12.4 km. This was unique in the Alpes-Maritimes and “assez exceptionelles (quite exceptional) en France.” [1: p81]
Over 7.7 km was graded between 46mm/m and 60 mm/m. 60 mm/m was specified as the steepest grade permitted, but during construction it became obvious that complying with the specification would unduly lengthen the line. Ultimately, the Department of Bridges and Roads permitted over 4.1 km to be built with steeper grades (between 61 and 68 mm/m), mainly in the Careï valley.
Banaudo points out that at “the same time, in Switzerland, Italy and Austria, such lines were put into service with vehicles equipped with specifically adapted traction and braking mechanisms, the Departement des Alpes-Maritimes and concessionaires (the TNL on Menton-Sospel and the Sud-France on the entire TAM network) did not seem to appreciate the level of risk involved in such operations.” [1: p81]
The TNL had been successfully running 168 hp bogie trams equipped with compressed air brakes on the Contes and Levens lines. However, trials on the Menton-Sospel line demonstrated that their electrical equipment could not sustain the stresses imposed by such long and steep gradients. “As soon as sustained effort was required, the entire circuit was at best overheated, the circuit breaker tripped and the fuses blew, the wheels of the trolleys could melt, the controller would start to smoke, and soldered connections could melt and cables ignite. It was therefore decided to modify these trams and equip them with more powerful motors. But pressure from the Departement to put the Sospel line into service, meant that the service was opened in the spring of 1912 with two standard type T2 passenger trams and one self-propelled goods van. These two-axle vehicles only had a power limit of 70 and 84 hp which did not even allow for the lightest of wagons to be towed. The handbrake was supplemented by (un freinage rheostatique) rheostaic braking. No air-brake was provided!” [1: p81]
Banaudo goes on to explain that, “The inadequacy of this equipment was tragically brought to light on 11th September 1912, when a train carrying gravel for finishing work on the line ran down the steepest slope: The handbrake was unable to hold it and the power pole separated from the overhead supply, rendering rheostatic braking inoperative. The convoy ended up derailing and crashing at the foot of the Monti viaduct, killing the driver and the conductor.” [1: p81]
Sadly, just two weeks later the first of the modified bogie power cars Nos. 214 to 216 entered service (on 23rd September 1912). These were equipped with “hand, air and rheostatic brakes, developing a power of 240 hp, these tramcars proved to be better adapted and could tow two passenger trailers or three goods wagons on the steepest slopes. In June 1913, two self-propelled goods vehicles were modified in the same way and moved to the Sospel line, which ensured regular freight traffic from summer onwards. A third ‘tracteur’ of a similar design was put into service the following year.” [1: p81]
In the meantime a derailment of a train on the TAM line between Cagnes-sur-Mer and Grasse occurred on 17th September 1913 at the Viaduc de Cloteirol near Villeneuve-Loubet. “This disaster caused many deaths and the commission formed following this accident to improve the safety of the departmental network covered all the lines, including that of Sospel on 29th January 1914. Following its conclusions, the Department of Bridges & Roads limited tram speeds to 16 km/h uphill and 12 km/h downhill as well as when crossing viaducts. Four safety stops were established for descending convoys at points located at the top of steep slopes: above the Viaduc du Caramel viaduct, at l’Ubac-Foran, above the Pont de Monti and at km 3,350 between this hamlet and the stop at Villa Caserta. The first two stops, where the tramway could leave and pick up passengers, were equipped with a point directing an out-of-control convoy into a dead-end siding with a strong contrary slope. … In Villa-Caserta, a similar device was provided to stop any runaway of vehicles parked at the terminus of the urban service.” [1:p81]
References
José Banaudo; Nice au fil de Tram, Volume 2: Les Hommes, Les Techniques; Les Editions de Cabri, Breil-sur-Roya, France, 2005.
This post covers the line from the Port of Monaco and Monte-Carlo to its terminus in Menton. A short article about this length of tramway was included in the French-language ‘Tram Magazine‘ of 1980 [7], and it is covered by José Banaudo in his book ‘Nice au fil du Tram, Volume 2‘ [1]
Earlier articles in this series can be found by following these links:
A project for a steam tramway linking the principality of Monaco to Menton via the Basse Corniche dates back to 1892 but seems that it may have encountered opposition from the various communes along the route. It is possible that this opposition centred on the use of steam as the power-source chosen. [7]
However, the Monaco Tribune suggests that it was clear that the capacity of steam engines to pull adequate loads on the gradients needed to serve the principality was always in doubt. The Triune comments: “At the start of the 1890s, there was a project for a Nice-Menton tramway line which would run through Monte Carlo. Following the example of French towns that were opening up tramway networks, horse-drawn at first, then with mechanical traction and finally electric-powered, the Principality eventually accepted the necessity of a line crossing Monaco, from Le Rocher to Saint-Roman, passing through Monte-Carlo and serving the Casino. The Principality’s topography was an issue: horse-drawn and steam trams were not an option. Electric trams had to be developed.” [6]
The Monaco tramways had three lines:
Place d’Armes – Saint Roman, opened on 14 May 1898.
Gare de Monaco – Place du Gouvernement, opened on 11 March 1899.
In 1897, the TNL (Tramways de Nice et du Littoral) obtained the concession for a metre-gauge coastal line between Cagnes, Nice, Monaco and Menton.
The main difficulty encountered in establishing this route was crossing the principality of Monaco, where in 1898 a local company opened an urban tramway powered by underground electric cables. [7]
While waiting for the establishment of an agreement to allow the passage of their trams through the principality, the TNL transported part of their fleet of by rail to Menton and opened a section of tramway from Garavan to Cap-Martin on 20th December 1902. One year later, this isolated section was linked to the rest of the network with the commissioning of the complete section from Monaco to Menton on 28th December 1903. [7]
In 1910, the TNL bought out the Monaco Tramways concession but continued to operate a split operation with connections in the principality between the Nice and Menton lines. During the Great War, the TNL’s tramway experienced heavy passenger and goods traffic, with the PLM line being reserved primarily for strategic transport. [7]
After the war, the Monaco to Menton line was designated Ligne No. 43 in the TNL’s new operating plan. But very quickly, road competition and the narrowness of the Basse Corniche roadway made sharing the road with lorries, vans and cars almost impossible. [7]
On 26th January 1931, the Nice to Monaco line was closed, followed a few months later by the departmental connection Menton (Villa Caserta) – Sospel. As during its first years of operation, the Menton tramway found itself isolated from the rest of the network and continued for a few months with reduced service to Monaco Garavan and Menton Villa Caserta, with the equipment based at the small Carnolès depot. This reprieve was only short-lived, because these lines were in turn closed in January 1932. [7]
This extract from the 1914 plan of Monaco shows the tramway running along the Condamine on the West side of the port before heading up the Avenue de Monte-Carlo. For a time there was a junction at the top of the gradient with trams for Menton turning North. [2]Tram outside Monte Carlo International Sporting Club. The position of the pole shows that this tram is heading down hill to the Port. [9]A similar view in 2011 looking down Avenue d’Ostende towards the Port. [Google Streetview, March 2011]A later image showing a tram just a little further up l’Avenue de Monte-Carlo (now Avenue d’Ostende), but on the other tramline heading up hill towards the Casino. [11]Tram outside Le Restaurant de Paris, Monte-Carlo. [10]The tram tracks outside Restaurant/Cafe de Paris. Apparently these tracks were only in use for a very short time around 1902/1903. This picture was shared by Jean-Paul Bascoul on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 19th July 2023. (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [12]Trams heading for Menton turned Northwest on Rue des Lilas (now Avenue Princesse Alice). For a short while in the very early 20th century a short branch continued up towards the Casino. Trams for Menton turned right at the top of Rue des Lilas onto Avenue de la Costa. [2]This extract from Google Maps shows the route of the tramway as the primrose yellow line snaking from the bottom to the top of the image. A little confusing because the North point of the 1914 map extract above is not the same as Google Maps. The tram route enters at the bottom of this extract along Avenue d’Ostende. It then turns through more than 90° to run along Avenue Princesse Alice, executing a reverse curve along the way and then turning onto Avenue de la Costa. [Google Maps, November 2023]These trams sit at the junction of the line to Menton (turning away to the left) and that to the Casino. They sit directly in front of the old Office de Poste et Telegraph. This image was shared on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group by Jean-Paul Bascoul on 7th July 2017. (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [21]The same location as appears in the colourised postcard view immediately above. This is the point at which the tramway turned Northwards from Avenue de Monte-Carlo onto what was Rue des Lilas (now Avenue Princesse Alice). Access to the Casino is along the road to the right which for a time carried a branch tramway serving Monte-Carlo Casino. [Google Streetview March 2011]The trams for Menton followed Rue des Lilas (now Avenue Princesse Alice). This image looks Northwest from the Southern end of the Avenue in 2021, [Google Streetview, July 2021]At the North end of Rue des Lilas (now Avenue Princesse Alice), trams turned right onto Avenue de la Costa. [Google Streetview, July 2021]Looking Northeast along Avenue de la Costa in 2021, towards Boulevard des Moulins. [Google Streetview, July 2021]Avenue de la Costa, after a short distance, led straight onto Boulevard des Moulins. It was only a short walk from this point to access the funicular railway to La Turbie. The terminus can be seen at the top of this map extract. [2]The primrose yellow line again indicates the line of the old tramway heading Northeast along Avenue de la Costa and then Boulvard des Moulins. [Google Maps, November 2023]Looking Northeast from the bottom of Boulevard des Moulins in 2021. The Office de Tourism can be seen on the right of this image. [Google Streetview, July 2021]Boulevard des Moulins continued in northeasterly direction towards Menton. Again, please don’t be fooled by the orientation of the North point on this 1914 map. [2]A tram on Boulevard des Moulins heading Northeast. This image was included in a Monaco Tribune article about Monaco’s trams (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). It also appears in José Banaudo’s book where he notes the change to a single track line from a double-track length which ran from Avenue des Beaux-Arts to the edge of the St. Roman dustrict of the principality. He describes the dual length of track elsewhere as running from Credit Lyonnaise to Hotel du Littoral. Banaudo tells us that the tram in this image is TNL No. 27, a Thompson-built tram providing a Monte-Carlo to Menton service. [6][1: p57]This postcard view of a tram on Boulevard des Moulins also appears in José Banaudo’s book. He notes that this tram is providing an urban service in Monaco and travelling Northeast on Boulevard des Moulins. [1:p57]So much has changed. Much of Boulevard des Moulins would be unrecognisable to those who knew it in the early 20th century. This is a similar view looking Northeast along Boulevard des Moulins. It is possible that the tree, visible in each of the monochrome images above, is that which appears in this image. The building immediately beyond the tree, where the street curves away to the left seems to be common to all three images. [Google Streetview, July 2021]
Boulevard des Moulins led directly onto Boulevard d’Italie. Banaudo tells us that “the line became single track in the Boulevard d’Italie, where two sidings allowed the cars of the coastal line to pass those providing the urban service. The latter’s terminus was established in the St. Roman district where the three-track TM depot-workshop was also located, just before the border between the principality of Monaco and the French commune of Roquebrune.” [1: p56]
This extract from a map shared in an earlier article shows the tramway heading on from Avenue des Moulins along Boulevard d’Italie into St. Roman. The article from which this image was taken was shared on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group by Jean-Paul Bascoul on 17th May 2015. [24]A tram on Avenue d’Italie in St. Roman. [27]
After leaving the principality, Banaudo tells us that the road and the tramway ran through picturesque even grandiose scenery as they run through “Cabbé cove, bounded to the east by the tip of Cape Martin. Since leaving the principality, five passing loops and sections of double track of varying lengths followed one another on this route where the Basse, Moyenne and Grande Corniche come together below the picturesque medieval village of Roquebrune.” [1: p56]
Boulevard des Moulins finishes just at the bottom-left of this Google Maps satellite image. Avenue d’Italie runs diagonally from the bottom-left of the image to the top-right. The road is marked by the primrose yellow line. This was the route of the TNL tramway.close to the top right of the image the Avenue d’Italie gives way to the Avenue de France at the gyratory. [Google Maps, November 2023]The primrose yellow line closest to the sea in this satellite image marks the route of the old tramway (now the D6098). Avenue de France gives way to Avenue Jean-Jaures towards the top right of the image. [Google Maps, November 2023]The route of the old tramway continues along the present D6098 (Avenue Jean-Jaures) until it joins the D6007 (Avenue de la Cote d’Azur) and then curves around the valley at Cabbe. [Google Maps, November 2023]The route of the old tramway continues along the Avenue Cote d’Azur (A6007). [Google Maps, November 2023]
Shortly after the location where the Basse, Moyenne and Grand Corniches meet, the “national road 7 describes a series of tight turns on a steep slope to cut across the base of Cap-Martin. In order to follow a more favorable route, the tramway penetrated quite far into the pine forest of the cape for approximately 1600 m on an independent platform. Here it served housing estates, vast properties and villas, some of which were not yet connected to motorable roads.” [1: p57]
A tram runs along the highway, some distance above sea-level, having passed through the district of St. Roman. [23]The tramway through Roquebrune and Cap-Martin was remote from the highway for about 1.6km. On careful inspection its route can be seen on this map. The pictures below show the length of tramway described by José Banaudo, which ran on its own formation for some distance. [17]A Thomson TNL tram passes in front of the Roquebrune post office, in the Cabbé district. The tram is heading for Monaco. I have struggled to locate this image in relation to modern maps of the area. [7]
Banaudo continues to describe the route followed by the tramway. He says that the old tramway ran out onto the Cap-Martin peninsula where it “described a long hairpin loop at the bottom of which was a 108 m tunnel, in a curve with a radius of 35 m and a slope of 70 mm/m. From the Cap-Martin stop, located at the exit of the tunnel, the single track was subsequently doubled to facilitate crossings in this hilly sector. The descent on the eastern slope of the cape then offered a vast panorama of the town of Menton and the Ligurian Riviera. Since entering [Cap-Martin], the line had lost around sixty metres in altitude when it reached the seashore at the Victoria Hotel, not far from which the Cap-Martin depot was located.” [1: p57]
Close to Roquebrune, trams left the main road to follow a dedicated formation. The highway had a series of tight curves and significant gradients which were not suitable for trams. From this point, the trams travelled out onto Cap-Martin while gradually descending almost to sea-level. [16]Approximately the same location as that shown in the photograph above, as it appears in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, October 2022]Looking Southeast, the old mainroad followed the route on the left trams ran on a separate route which has been transformed to Avenue Paul Doumer, which appears on the right side of this photograph. [Google Streetview, October 2022]
Today, Avenue Paul Doumer (D52) follows the route of the old tramway fairly faithfully as it heads out onto Cap-Martin. Avenue Paul Doumer gives way to Avenue Sylvio de Monleon which follows the old tramway to and through the location of the tramway tunnel which has been supplanted by a road tunnel on the same alignment.
Avenue Paul.Doumer (D52) shown in grey follows the route of the old tramway. [Google Maps, November 2023]The tram in this photograph is heading towards Roquebrune and then Menton. The single-track line is on its own formation, separated from the road both horizontally and vertically. [15]Looking Southeast on Avenue Paul Doumer. The main road is marked by the green railings at a higher level. This is approximately the same location as that shown in the postcard view immediately above. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The D52 continues to follow the old tramway route, although it takes the new name of Avenue Sylvio de Monleon on the right third of this extract from Google Maps. [Google Maps, November 2023]The old tramway turned through a tight hairpin bend , the first part of which was in tunnel. [Google Maps, November 2023]The road tunnel that replaced the narrower tramway tunnel. [Google Streetview, March 2023]A tram leaves the tunnel on Cap-Martin and approaches the tram stop. The pedestrian access to the tram stop appears to the left of the tram in this image. [14]From a slightly different angle, the modern tunnel portal close to the old tram stop is visible in this image. The image shows that the steps which provided access to the tram stop are mirrored by similar steps in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, March 2023]The tram stop on Cap-Martin. The tram is heading for Monaco. [16]This image shows the same location today. [Google Streetview, March 2023]A tram running downhill towards the Plage de Carnoles. [26]A similar location in the 21st century, looking down Avenue Sylvio de Monleon towards the Plage de Carnoles. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Banaudo mentioned Hotel Victoria in his description of the tram route. In the 21st century it remains at the same location as in the early 20th century. It features at the bottom of this extract from Google Maps. South of the Hotel Victoria a block of flats can be seen adjacent to the tight curve on the D52. Those flats sit on the site of an old chapel – Chapelle du Cap-Martin. [Google Maps, November 2023]The ruins of the Chapelle du Cap-Martin with dual tram tracks running close to its doors. [22]A early postcard view showing a TNL tram running past the Chapel towards Menton. [34]The same location in 2023. [Google Streetview, April 2023]This extract from the map seen earlier in this article shows the tram route entering bottom-centre, close to what would have been the Chapelle du Cap-Martin, and running for just a short distance along Promenade du Midi before turning inland to pass under the PLM mainline. [17]An early postcard view of La Plage de Carnoles, looking East from Cap-Martin. Tram tracks are clearly visible on the beach and a tram appears to be heading for Menton. [45]Looking Southwest in 1910 towards Cap-Martin from La Plage de Carnoles. Banaudo notes that at the time it was built, the tramway sat on the beach. [25]A similar view in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, April 2023]This image shows a tram running along the edge of the beach in Carnoles. Just to the right of this image trams turned away from the beach. [7]
After running past the Chapelle du Cap-Martin trams ran alongside the beach for a short distance. The route they took has since become the Promenade du Midi. They turned inland at what is now Avenue Francois de Monleon and ran under the PLM mainline before turning to the right along Avenue Julia, a road which appears to no longer exist, and following the curve of that road as far as its junction with what is now the D6007. The length before that junction was along what is now Avenue du Marechal Foch.
This old post card image shows a tram on Avenue François de Monleon. It was shared on the Menton du Passé au Present Facebook Page on 3rd December 2017. [35] Avenue François de Monleon in the 21st century at a similar location to the monochrome image above. [Google Streetview, November 2023]Trams ran Northwest along Avenue François de Monleon passing under the PLM mainline through the bridge shown here. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Running Northeast the tramway met the N7 (now the D6007) and then turned right along it towards the PLM mainline and the beach along what is now Avenue Aristide Briand. [17]The primrose yellow D6007 shows the route of the old tramway. [Google Maps, November 2023]This monochrome image shows a tram on Avenue Julia (now Avenue du Marechal Foch) adjacent to St. Joseph’s Catholic Church in Carnoles. The road on the right of the image is Route National 7 (RN7). [19]This modern image shows approximately the same location in the 21st century. Google Streetview, October 2022]Turning through about 120°, this view looks down Avenue Aristide Briand towards the railway bridge which is shown below. The tram tracks are clearly visible in the road surface. This old postcard image was shared on the Menton du Passé au Present Facebook Page on 9th August 2017. [18]Trams once ran along what is now Avenue Aristide Briand (D6007) and passed through this railway bridge before running Northeast closer to the sea. [Google Streetview, October 2022]Pont de l’Union sat at the boundary between Carnoles and Menton. This image is an early 20th century postcard view of Pont de l’Union. It looks East. The overbridge carrying the PLM line is directly ahead at the extreme left of this image. It is not possible to show a modern version of this image as the photograph is taken from a point inside one of the more modern buildings on Avenue Aristide Briand. [7]The view East-northeast east along Avenue Aristide Briand which is the route being travelled by the tram in the monochrome image above. [Google Streetview, October 2022]
The TNL had a depot at Carnolès-plage from 1902 to 1932. [20] Banaudo notes that the tramway passed twice under the PLM Nice to Ventimiglia line. After “the second underbridge, the Union bridge over the Gorbio valley demarcated the territories of the communes of Roquebrune and Menton.” [1: p57]
Banaudo keeps his comments on the remainder of the old tramway route succinct. On entering the commune if Menton, he says, “the tram followed the Avenue de la Madone (today Général De Gaulle), the Borrigo Bridge, the Avenue Carnot, the Biovès garden which covers the Careï torrent then the Avenue Felix Faure. Place St. Roch, where the Sospel line branched off, marked the entry into the old town of Menton. Here, the single track made its way through the very narrow Rue St. Michel then entered the port where it followed the Quai Bonaparte. The tramway entered Garavan beach then ended its course near the Hanbury fountain, a few hundred metres from the Italian border at that time.” [1: p57]
We will try to unpack Banaudo’s description with images that show the route through Menton. Trams entered Menton on the RN7 (now D6007). Until the mid-20th century people were expected to leave the tram at the boundary between Roquebrune Cap-Martin and Menton to declare the goods they were carrying. The Octroi, shown below, was the ‘custom point’.
Everyone crossing into Menton was expected to declare taxable goods at the ‘border’ of the commune. [7]The location of le Pont de Borrigo at the point where Avenue Cernuschi met the RN7 (D6007). [Google Maps, November 2023]Le Pont de Burrigo close to the beach on the road into Menton. The road over the bridge carried the tramway. [49]A view West back across the location of Pont de Burrigo. [Google Streetview, October 2022]The tram has stopped on Avenue Carnot next to Le Kiosque de Musique (Bandstand) in the gardens alongside the Promenade de Midi. [7]Looking East along Avenue de Carnot, approaching the centre of Menton. This was the route taken by the tram. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
Trams continued along Avenue Carnot past l’Eglise Anglais and onto Avenue Felix Faure.
Avenue Carnot runs past St. John’s Church in Menton (the Anglican Church). Tram tracks can be seen on the road surface in this image which was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Pierre Richert on 8th January 2018. [37]L’Avenue Carnot and St. John’s Anglican Church in 2023. [Google Streetview, March 2023]St. John’s Church is shown on this extract from Google Maps with Avenue de Carnot on its South side. The D6007 turns right and then left to run along the Promenade. The old tramway ran straight ahead onto Avenue Felix Faure. [Google Maps, November 2013]St. John’s Church can be seen in the bottom-left of this image. Avenue Felix Faure runs Northeast from St. John’s Church. It is the grey line, one block back from the Promenade. [Google Maps, November 2023]Avenue Felix Faure, Menton, in the early 20th century, looking towards the old town. Tram tracks are visible in the road surface. [38]Avenue Felix Faure in the early 20th century. This is a view from a very similar location as the image above, this time a tram can be seen heading out of the old town towards Monaco. [40]The same location that appears in the two monochrome images above, as it appears in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, April 2023]One street corner along Avenue Felix Faure, looking Northeast. The only thing in common with the present is the Hotel des Colonies building, which you can see on the left of image. [51]Approximately the same view in the 21st century. [Google Streetview March 2023]Avenue Felix Faure, looking Southwest from a point close to Place St. Roch. [50]A similar view in the 21st century, looking Southwest. [Google Streetview April 2023]This old postcard image shows Avenue Felix Faure entering Place St. Roch. It looks Southwest from Place St. Roch. Overhead tramway cables can be seen running in two directions, ahead into Avenue Felix Faure and right into Rue Partouneaux. The tram tracks leading into Avenue Felix Faure can be seen to the left of the photograph. Note the publisher shelter close to the centre of the image. [53] A similar view to the one immediately above. A statue now sits in front of the building. [52]A similar modern view looking across Place St. Roch towards the Southwest and Avenue Felix Faure. [Google Streetview, March 2023]
Rue Partouneaux on the North side of Place St. Roch was followed by trams for Sospel which set off from or terminated at the mouth of Rue St. Michel at Place St. Roch. This route is covered elsewhere in this series about trams in and around Nice:
Three articles written at different times, in chronological order are as below:
Avenue Felix-Faure in Menton, seen from Place St. Roch, looking Northeast. On the left we can see the waiting kiosk of the TNL tram urban lines. There is a tram waiting at the stop but rather than following the main route between Monaco and Menton it will leave along Rue Partouneaux to the Careï valley. It will possibly stop at the Villa Caserta terminus, or it will continue towards Monti, Castllon, the valley of Bévéra and the Sospel terminus. This image was shared by Jean-Paul Bascul on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 28th September 2023 (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [5]A similar view, looking Northeast in the 21st century from Place St. Roch. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Looking East from Place St. Roch along the most easterly length of Avenue Felix Faure, we see a tram heading West, although it is not clear whether it will head for Monaco or bear round in front of the camera onto Rue Partouneaux to the Carei Valley. [7]An early 20th century postcard image of Rue St. Michel/Avenue Felix Faure, looking East, Tram tracks are visible in the road surface. [29]The same location in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, April 2008]An early postcard view of Rue St. Michel, looking West. [39]Rue St. Michel in 2008 looking West at approximately the same location as in the postcard image above. [Google Streetview, December 2008]Rue St. Michel in 2008 looking East. [Google Streetview, December 2008]A powered car and trailer stopped at Place aux Herbes in the 1920s. This image was shared on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 23rd March 2022 by Jean-Paul Bascoul. (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [3]The same location in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, 2021]Rue St. Michel looking West in the early 20th century. The tramway track is easily seen in the cobbled road surface, the overhead cables in the sky! [46]The same location, close to the eastern end of Rue St. Michel in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, 2008]A further extract from Google Maps. The tramway ran along Rue St. Michel which enters this image just beneath the Carrefour City blue flag to the bottom-left of the image and runs in an approximately straight line East-northeast to meet the present D6007 (Quai Bonaparte). Here trams turned North along the D6007 before heading East towards Garavan. [Google Maps, November 2023]
Trams left the East end of Rue St. Michel and crossed Place du Cap before running out onto Quai Bonaparte.
An early 20th century postcard image of Place du Cap, Menton. Overhead wires for the trams cross the image and, to the right side of the image a tram can be seen turning into Place du Cap from Quai Bonaparte. [32]This image was shared by Jean Claude Volpi on the Entraide Menton Monaco Roquebrune Cap Martin et sa région Facebook Group on 17th September 2021. It shows the tramway leaving Place du Cap. It refers to the Quai as ‘Quai de Monleon’. [48]The old postcard image refers to the Quai as ‘Quai Boneparte. The camera is situated a little further to the North than the camera in the image above. [31]A short distance to the North again, this old postcard image is annotated ‘Le Boulevard de Garavan’. Literally only a couple of hundred metres along the shore from the last postcard image. This colourised image comes from the early 20th century. [30]The modern D6007 now follows the Quai Bonaparte/Quai de Monleon. A constant feature is the large building at the centre of this image which seems to have a central gable. In the 21st century this is the Menton campus of Sciences Po Paris. [Google Streetview, April 2023]This last extract from Google Maps shows the remaining length of the old tramway. The line followed the Promenade de Garavan and is shown in primrose yellow. It was on the seaward side of the RN7 (D6007). The terminus was close to the grey flag at the right side of this image. It was adjacent to La Fontaine de la Frontiere. [Google Maps November 2020]A tram heads towards Menton old town along Boulevard de Garavan. [7]The view from a very similar location in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, March 2023]A tram stopped on La Promenade de Garavan. Menton’s old town can be seen in the distance. [26]A similar view from Porte de France in 2023. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The terminus of the line is some distance ahead in this view. The tram is heading towards the terminus of the line. [26]This image was shared on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 23rd March 2022 by Jean-Paul Bascoul. Looking East, it shows a tram at the extreme Eastern end of the TNL network, about to set off for Nice. [4]As can be seen close to the centre of this view looking East, the Fontaine de la Frontiere still stands in its historical location, although the Italian border has moved further East! [Google Streetview, March 2023]
The terminus of the TNL network was on La Promenade de Garavan, immediately West of the Fontaine de la Frontiere which itself was very close to the then Italian border.
The tram terminus was just to the West of the Fontaine de la Frontiere in almost exactly the same location as the earlier horse-drawn tram in this old postcard image. [47]The Fontaine de la Frontiere in 2023. At one time the border with Italy was a little to the East of the fountain. [Google Streeview, November 2022]
Images in this article credited to Jean-Paul Bascoul can be found on his blog: Monaco 4Ever.blogspot.com.
References
José Banaudo; Nice au fil du Tram, Volume 2: Les Hommes, Les Techniques; Les Editions de Cabri, Breil-sur-Roya, France, 2005.
There were two branch lines worth noting between Nice and Monte Carlo: one from Pont-St. Jean to St. Jean-Cap Ferrat; one from Monaco-Gare to Monaco-Ville.
The tram route from Nice to Monte-Carlo is covered in an article which can be found by following this link:
This branch line was just under 2 km in length and ran between Pont-St. Jean at 27 m above sea-level to a terminus in St. Jean-Cap Ferrat at 3 m above sea-level.
Construction of the line started in June 1906 and it was open to traffic by 7th December 1907.
Along with the rest of the network it received a line number on 1st January 1923 – No. 22. It remained in service as a tramway until 9th March 1931, when it was replaced by a bus service. Rails were lifted by 20th June 1933.
A postcard photograph of Pont St. Jean with a tram approaching from the terminus on St. Jean Cap Ferrat, the photograph was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Laurent Mannu on 20th April 2022. Travelling the opposite direction a tram would almost immediately stop at l’Octroi. [6]A very similar view in 2023. [Google Streetview, March 2023]
The line was single-track throughout with two intermediate passing places. It left the mainline between Nice and Monte-Carlo at Pont-St. Jean which sat at the point where the communes of Villefranche and Beaulieu shared a common border and at the point where the PLM line between Nice and Ventimille was bridged to provide access to the coastline. This was also close to the Octroi de St. Jean which, as we have noted elsewhere, was a building which housed municipal tax collectors and allowed them to control and tax goods transported by travellers.
After crossing the railway line trams headed down Avenue Denis Semaria (M25) out onto the peninsula. The ‘new’ road, M125, can be seen heading West alongside the railway line. [Google Maps, November 2023]
The peninsula was an attractive area to build a home and the Tramway found its way through villas and gardens set among pine trees.
The M25 had to be rebuilt in to the West of and in parallel to its original route which was too narrow to accommodate both trams and other traffic.
The Gardens of Ephrussi de Rothschild sat above the tramroad to the East and Villa Andreae Nice to the West was to the right. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
After a passing-loop close to the chapel of St. François in the middle of the peninsula, the line descended eastwards to reach its terminus located at the port of St. Jean-Cap-Ferrat.
The tram route, as shown on a map of the area around Nice in 1914. [10]The tramway continued along Avenue Denis Semaria close to Jardinerie du Cap-Ferrat Marcarelli. [Google Maps, November 2023] The route continued to follow Avenue Denis Semaria and began to head down towards [Google Streetview, October 2022]The tramway turned away from one arm of Avenue Denis Semaria to head down to the Port along another arm of the same named road and following the route number M25. [Google Streetview, October 2022]The tramway continued round the curve on Avenue Denis Semaria. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Avenue Denis Semaria runs first due East and then turns round to the South as it approaches the Port and the location of the tramway terminus. [Google Maps, November 2023]Now heading due East on Avenue Denis Semaria (M25) and approaching the East coast of the peninsula. [Google Streetview, April 2023]A tram en-route from Pont-St. Jean down to the Port curving down along Avenue Denis Semaria not far from the Port. This image was shared on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 1st September 2014 by Jean-Paul Bascoul. (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [11]A very similar view in 2023. [Google Streetview, April 2023]Turning through 180°, this is the view along Avenue Denis Semaria towards the Port. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The bus terminus at Port-St. Jean. The tram terminus was a few hundred metres South , behind the camera. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The tram terminus was established at the port of St. Jean-Cap-Ferrat, Place du Centenaire, near the statue of the Fisherman, the work of Claude Vignon-Rouvier, wife of the politician Maurice Rouvier. Around 1910. The tram in the picture is made up of a powered car and a trailer. [4]A later view without a tram present. The buildings on the left have seen some significant work undertaken. The first is now a three-storey building and both that and the adjacent property have been extended towards the street. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group on 28th February 2022 by Alain Nissim. [5]A similar view in 2023 looking through the location of the tramway terminus to the North. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The cafe at the terminus of the tramway. The image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Alain Nissim on 18th February 2022. [9]A postcard view of Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat – Place du Centenaire – Tram Stop – Publisher: Giletta N°830. The photograph was taken sometime around 1920 and shows a powered car running round its trailer ready for the journey back to Pont-St. Jean. [4]A similar view in 2023 looking through the location of the tramway terminus to the South. [Google Streetview, April 2023]The Namuoma Restaurant at St. Jean-Cap Ferrat, with the tramway tracks visible to the bottom right of the photograph. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Alain Nissim on 16th August 2023. [7]Another view of the terminus. This image was shared on the Comte de Nice et son Histoire Facebook Group by Alain Nissim on 5th July 2021. [8]A similar view in 2023 looking through the location of the tramway terminus to the South. [Google Streetview, April 2023]
Monaco-Gare – Monaco-Ville
This line was marginally over 1 km in length. It low point was at Place d’Armes, just 19 metres above sea-level, its high point was at 59metres above sea-level at Place de la Visitation. It was single track over its entire length with no passing places . It also did not have passing loops at its two termini as it only used powered cars with no trailers.
Banaudo tells us that, “Starting from the PLM station square, it went down Avenue de la Gare for 101 m to Place d’Armes. This node in the Monegasque network formed a connection point with the TNL line towards Nice and the TM line towards Monte Carlo and St. Roman. Crossing this, the single track climbed by a long ramp of 77 mm/m the Avenue de la Porte-Neuve to the end of the Rocher dominating Fort Antoine, then a sharp bend brought the line back into the Avenue des Pins. The terminus sat at the entrance to the old town of Monaco, on the Place de la Visitation where the government palace stands.” [1: p54]
A plan of the different tram and train lines in Monaco and Monte-Carlo in the early 20th century. The article from which this image was taken was shared on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group by Jean-Paul Bascoul on 17th May 2015. The line between the station and the Place de la Visitation runs left to right at the bottom of the map. [15]This map shows This branch line tramway ran from Monaco-Gare at the Northwest corner of this map extract through Place d’Armes and then along Avenue de la Porte Neuve before swinging sharply round to the West along Avenue des Pins, to terminate in Place de la Visitation. [16]Monaco Railway Station in the early 20th century. [19]Looking Northwest along Avenue Prince Pierre towards the location of Monaco Railway Station. [Google Streetview, July 2021]Looking along Avenue Prince Pierre into Place d’Armes. [Google Streetview, July 2022]The junction of Avenue de la Gare with Place d’Armes looking towards the railway station. This image was shared by Jean-Paul Bascoul on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 23rd June 2017. (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [13]A tram on Place d’Armes in the 1920s. This image was shared by Jean-Paul Bascoul on the Monaco4Ever Facebook Group on 20th June 2020. (Collection privée J-Paul Bascoul). [14]La Place d’Armes looking towards Monaco Railway Station which sits at the far end of Avenue de la Gare (now Avenue Prince Pierre). [12]A colourised postcard view of the junction between Avenue de la Gare (now Avenue Prince Pierre) and Place d’Armes. [17]Place d’Armes sat below the Palace of Monaco. It was the point at which trams from the railway station crossed the Nice to Monte-Carlo line and then headed up onto the rock. [16]The tramway up onto the Rock followed Avenue de la Porte Neuve. The tramway to the casino (and on to Menton) followed the parallel Avenue du Port. [Google Streetview, 2011]The tramway to the Casino and then on to Menton ran up the West side of the port. The tramway up onto the Rock via the Avenue de la Porte Neuve. [16]The tramway turned from the Avenue de la Porte Neuve into the Avenue des Pins and heads to its terminus at Place de la Visitation. [16]The tight curve of Avenue Saint-Martin leads round towards Avenue des Pins. [Google Streetview, 2011]The tramway followed Avenue des Pins heading off to the right leading towards Place de la Visitation. [Google Streetview, 2011]Place de la Visitation at the top of Avenue des Pins was the terminus of the tramway. [Google Streetview, 2011]
Images in this article accredited to Jean-Paul Bascoul come from his blog – Monaco4ever.blogspot.com.
References
José Banaudo; Nice au fil du Tram, Volume 2: Les Hommes, Les Techniques; Les Editions de Cabri, Breil-sur-Roya, France, 2005.
From late April to mid May 2018 my wife and I were in Uganda. This was my 6th visit to the country. On the first, in 1994, I travelled to Kampala from Mombasa on the railway. It was a fantastic journey in a slow moving train with silver service in the dining car and with beds made up for us by staff each night. There were two separate trains, a njght train from Mkmbasa to Nairobi run by the then Kenya Railways and a train from Nairobi to Kampala run by Uganda Railways.
The track is metre-gauge.
This short series of posts tells the story of the line to 2018 and then looks forward from that year into the future. In recent times the railway system in Uganda has had a chequered history and had been relatively badly managed, as you will see. The present network is in a dilapidated state. The network is shown in the image below.
The country of Uganda has about 1,350 kms of railway lines and most of it has not been operational for over 25 years. Repairs had been completed on the Tororo-Gulu line and were still ongoing on the Gulu-Pakwach Line in early 2014. [1]
The railway originating at Mombasa on the Indian Ocean connects to Tororo in Uganda, where it branches westward to Jinja, Kampala, and Kasese and northward to Mbale, Soroti, Lira, Gulu, and Pakwach (to the south-east of Arua and on the northern edge of the Murchison Falls National Park – the Pakwach Bridge crosses the White Nile close to the town).
There was no chance, in 2018, for me to check out the railway system. After a very short stay in Kampala we spent the rest of our time in the south-west of the country in Kyegegwa, Rukungiri and Kisoro.
Back in 1994, I was taking slides and being very careful not to exhaust my supply of film. How much things have changed! I do have four pictures, taken at Mombasa railway station, of coaches from the early to mid 20th Century which were stored among slightly more modern stock, at least three seemed still to be in use. …..
The Uganda Railway was built during what became known as the Scramble for Africa, (the struggle between European powers for dominance in Africa). It provided a strategic link between the coast at Mombasa and the Great Lakes region. In doing so, it effectively secured British domination of the region.[2],[3]
The Uganda Railway was named for its ultimate destination. Its original length of 660 miles (or 1056 kilometres) lay entirely in what we now call Kenya.
Work on the railway began at the port of Mombasa, in what was then called British East Africa, in 1896. The intended terminus at Kisumu on the shores of Lake Victoria was reached in 1901.[2],[4]
Construction was carried out principally by labourers from the Indian subcontinent, 32,000 of whom were brought in because of a lack of local labour in very sparcely populated areas of East Africa. The horrendous truth is that the line was built on the lives of those labourers. 2,498 workers died during the construction of the railway.[2],[5] An artists impression of the work is shown in the image below (courtesy of Charan Kundi).
Many of the labourers returned to India but 6,724 decided to remain after the line’s completion, creating a community of Indian East Africans.
The railway is, almost in its entirety, single-track. A massive logistical exercise was put in place to import from India a very significant amount of steelwork – rails; fishplates and bolts; keys; and girders. Over 1.2 million sleepers were also required. To secure the necessary throughput of materials, Kilindini Harbour ws created in Mombasa. “The railway was a huge logistical achievement and became strategically and economically vital for both Uganda and Kenya. It helped to suppress slavery, by removing the need for humans in the transport of goods.” [2],[6]
The railway line had a significant impact. It effectively created Uganda and Kenya as the countries that they became. As we have already noted, the railway defeated the slave trade in British East Africa. It allowed heavy equipment to be transported with relative ease.
The use of indian sub-continent labour resulted in a very significant minority of Asians in East Africa. These Indians worked as “dukawallas” (shopkeepers), artisans, traders, clerks, and, finally, lower-level administrators. Excluded from the middle and senior ranks of the colonial government and from farming, they became a commercial middleman and professional community.[7] The British administration encouraged European settlement and farms were set up for coffee and tea production with the railway available to ensure easy shipping to Europe for processing. As the numbers of settlers and farms increased native populations became alienated from their land and seeds were sown for the later struggle for independence. At the same time, inceeases in white settlement made demands on the railway. New small stations were required to allow transportation of agricultural produce. These stations included: Nakuru, Naivasha, Tigoni, Kijabe and Sigona.
In addition, the railway contributed to increased urbanisation. Many of today’s towns in Kenya, and some in Uganda, have reulted from the presence of the railway. Mombasa urbanisation can be traced to the start of the construction of the line. Nairobi was a rail depot placed in the middle of a swamp, and is now the capital of Kenya. Other towns for which this is true are … Kikuyu, Naivasha, Nakuru (where the main line splits, one branch going to Kisumu and the other to Uganda), Nanyuki, Eldoret (originally called “64″ its distance, in miles, from the railhead at the time), Kitale (a small farming community in the foothills of Mount Elgon), Kisumu (then called port Florence, a city and port on Lake Victoria allowing ferry transport between Kenya, Tanganyika (modern Tanzania) and Uganda), Port Bell (a rail-linked port, near to Kampala, on Lake Victoria allowing ferry transport between Kenya, Tanganyika and Uganda), and Jinja.
Tourism also began to develop. “The railway provided a ‘modern’ means of transport from the East African coast to the higher plateaus of the interior. US president Theodore Roosevelt is one of the notable people who had safari adventures aboard a train in the early days of the use of the Kenya-Uganda railway.”[7]
The railway also opened up the interior to systematic government programmes to attack slavery, witchcraft, disease and famine. [7]
We have already heard that close to 2,500 of the 32,000 workers on the line died during its construction. There are two particular causes worthy of significant note.
The first concerns the death of a number of conctruction workers in 1898 during the building of a bridge across the Tsavo River. Hunting mainly at night, a pair of maneless male lions stalked and killed at least 28 Indian and African workers – although some accounts put the number of victims as high as 135.[2],[8] The picture above shows one of the two lions and Lieutenant-Colonel John H Petterson who killed it.
The second concerns resistance from locals. Building the railway met local resistance on various occasions. A major incident was the Kedong Massacre, when the Maasai attacked a railway worker’s caravan killing around 500 people because two Maasai girls had been raped. An Englishman unconnected to the railway, Andrew Dick, led a counter-attack against them, but ran out of ammunition and was speared to death by the Maasai.[2],[9] At the turn of the 20th century, the railway construction was disturbed by the resistance of the Nandi people led by Koitalel Arap Samoei. He was killed in 1905 by Richard Meinertzhagen, finally ending the Nandi resistance.[2],[9]
Some of the socio-economic background to the construction of the Uganda Railway will be considered in later articles in this series.
3. Richard T. Ogonda & George M. Onyango; Development of Transport and Communication. In William Robert Ochieng’;Historical Studies and Social Change in Western Kenya. Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers, 2002. p219–231.
4. Richard T. Ogonda; Transport and Communications in the Colonial Economy. In William Robert Ochieng’ & R. M. Maxon; An Economic History of Kenya. Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers, 1992. p129–146.
5. Christian Wolmar; Blood, Iron & Gold: How the Railways Transformed the World. London: Atlantic Books, 2009.
6. Frank Richardson Cana; British East Africa. In Hugh Chisholm. Encyclopædia Britannica. 4 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press, 1911. p601–606.
Roger Farnworth 
