Chapter XIX: At Bizerta

The seaport of Bizerta, or Benzerta—the Hippo Dzarytus or Zarytus of the Romans—is, like Goletta, situated on the shores of the Mediterranean. It is built on a narrow tongue of land which divides the sea from two vast sheets of water of great extent and depth, once known as the Hipponitus Lacus and Sisaræ Palus, and now commonly called the lakes of Bizerta and Gebel Ishkel. The shallow canal which joins the Mediterranean to these land-locked seas divides Bizerta into two distinct portions. The one covers a small island formed by a bifurcation in the channel of the canal, and joined to the land on either side by bridges of great antiquity; the other rises on the slope of a hill and is surrounded, like most Tunisian towns, with a crenellated rampart, and crowned by a dilapidated _kasbah_ or citadel. A large part of the higher quarter of Bizerta has shared in the decay of its fortifications, but a series of marble fountains, surmounted by elegantly carved inscriptions, still testify to the existence of a past period of Moslem power. The fantastic windings of the house-bordered canal give to Bizerta the appearance of a miniature Venice in reduced circumstances. In making the circuit of the _enceinte_ wall, I remarked an inscription placed upside down in the bastion. Although much disfigured, the words YPPOS SARITOS were plainly discernible. The vaulted roofs of the magazines and shops in both parts of the town are supported almost invariably by Roman columns. The English janissary Haj Hamda took me to his corn-store to see what he termed “an inscribed pillar.” I read in bold characters:—

IMP CAES

MAVR IIIIVS

ANTONINVS

PIVS IIII X AVG

PARTHICVS MAX

BRITANNICVS MAX

GIRMANICVS MAX

IRIB POIX VIIII

COS ~IIII~ PP

RIS ~III~ VII

----------

XLIX

----------

There was a time when English statesmen knew the importance of the great land-locked harbour lying behind the crumbling walls and straggling streets of Bizerta. The lakes have been surveyed and re-surveyed by English seamen, but apparently only for the purpose of pointing out the expediency of acquiring them to our neighbours. A glance at the chart of the Mediterranean shows better than pages of reasoning what the possession of Bizerta really means. After assisting in a survey of the lakes in 1845, Lieutenant Spratt contributed a valuable paper on the subject to the “Journal of the Geographical Society,” containing a complete description of the locality.

“The lakes,” writes Lieutenant (now Admiral) Spratt, “have often been noticed by the Ancient and Middle Age authors under the names of Hipponitus Lacus and Sisaræ Palus.

“The Hipponitus Lacus was the more northern and larger of the two lakes, and answers to that of Bizerta, taking its modern name from an important fortified town situated at its mouth. The Sisaræ Palus is now called the Lake of Gebel Ishkel, from a high and picturesque mountain rising from its southern shore, but which must have been formerly an island, as it is now separated from the plain by an extensive marsh.

“The two lakes run in an east-north-east and west-south-west direction of each other, and are each about eight geographical miles long. The Lake of Bizerta is five and a half miles broad, whilst that of Gebel Ishkel is only three and a half. This latter is a remarkable turbid shallow lake of fresh water, but the former (Bizerta) is clear, and nearly as salt as the sea with which it communicates.

“The greatest depth of the water in the Lake of Bizerta is eight fathoms, with an average of from five to six throughout.

“The channel by which it communicates with the sea is at its north-east angle, and is about four miles in length and half-a-mile broad, except near its mouth, where it is contracted into a narrow-winding canal. In the wide channel there is a depth of from four to seven fathoms, but in the intricate part between the fishery and the bar at the mouth of the canal, which in its windings is nearly a mile in length, there is from two to ten feet only. Across one part of the channel there is a solid stone bridge of seven narrow arches, and again a little below it the channel is obstructed by rocks, said to be the foundation of another bridge.”

On the 1st May 1881 several French ironclads appeared off Bizerta. The governor of the town was summoned to surrender it to the French, and in compliance with the Bey’s orders he at once declared that he should offer no resistance. Before nightfall a French garrison occupied the town, the French flag was flying on the forts, and the chastisement of the Khamírs assumed a new phase of its gradual development. Never perhaps in the history of the world’s warfare, was a more important conquest effected without the striking of a blow. When the news reached the Bey at Tunis, he said, “I am sorry to see my flag dishonoured at Bizerta, but _now_ at any rate England and Italy cannot remain silent.” Muhamed es Sadek was, however, as events soon proved, egregiously mistaken.

The following protest was at once sent to M. Roustan:—

_May 2d_, 1881.

The Governor of Bizerta has informed us yesterday that several French ships of war appeared before Bizerta, and the occupation of the city and forts was demanded by the French, under threats of recourse to violence. As we are at peace with France, the governor was not in a position to resist; and the French troops have occupied Bizerta and hoisted the French flag on our forts. This occupation, at a time when we are at peace with your Government, is a proceeding without precedent, and is opposed to all the rules and prescriptions of the law of nations. In consequence, we protest in the most solemn manner against this occupation. We must express our sorrow at being thus treated by a Government which we have always endeavoured to conciliate, and with which it has been our constant endeavour to preserve the most friendly relations.

The best commentary on this “proceeding without precedent” is contained in Admiral Spratt’s letter, which appeared in the _Times_ of the 16th May.

_Admiral Spratt to Mr. Montague Guest, M.P._

I fully confirm the fact of the Lake of Bizerta being easily made available for the fleets of the world, or for any of them—and at a small cost—for I would risk my reputation upon its being effected for less than a quarter of a million. All that is necessary is an excavation of about a quarter of a mile through the narrow strips of alluvial plain that separates the lake from the Bay of Bizerta, and some dredging for about the same length on either side of this narrow strip, so as to connect the deep water within the lake with the bay outside, and thus open it to the Mediterranean, by which means the largest ships of any navy and the fleets of the world could find accommodation and security within Bizerta Lake; and it would thus become the finest and most commodious harbour in the Mediterranean. Situated as it is, at the threshold of the central strait of the Mediterranean, if possessed by France or by Italy, it would become the most important strategic naval port within it, and completely command the communications between the eastern and western divisions. France, which now, in Toulon, is 400 miles distant upon one flank of that line, would thus be only four hours’ steaming from it on the other flank, where not only could she have another naval arsenal, but a spacious and perfectly enclosed basin for the secret practice of torpedo fleets, gunnery exercise, and even some manœuvring with a few ships, and all in what would become a secret port. Consequently, all the political as well as the commercial interests of other nations between the east and west, to say nothing of Malta, would be at the mercy of France or Italy—whichever becomes possessed of this most important strategic harbour—as will be evident to every one possessing a knowledge of the physical conditions, depth of water, and capacity of the Bizerta Lake, as shown in the _Journal of the Geographical Society_, to which you have referred in your recent letter in the _Times_. In the interests of the future peace of Europe, neither of the great naval Powers should become possessed of it—neither France, Italy, nor England—all having equal interest in its neutrality, and neither having a right stronger than the other to wrench it it from the neutral Power now in possession, and in rightful possession of it. Any transference of it to either of the three naval Powers would at once place the balance of naval power in the Mediterranean, in the near future, in the hands of that Power, and would be an irresistible incentive to that nation to devote double its energies to the development of its fleet, and a naval preponderance, involving a necessity on the part of the others to do the same in the interests of their commercial and political prestige. Such are my views as a naval officer founded on long experience with the interests now connected with the Mediterranean, and with a perfect knowledge of the lake and locality of Bizerta. As the Italian press has recently very fully entered into, I may say exposed, these interests, I, as you have requested it, give you the above facts and details, being no longer under any necessity of retaining them from the general public.

Mr. Guest shortly afterwards published a pamphlet on the subject of Bizerta, illustrated with charts and maps of very great value.[40] His zealous efforts to show that the occupation of this important naval position was but another step to the fulfilment of the Prince de Joinville’s dream of converting the Mediterranean into a French lake, did not find favour in May 1881 with those in high places. Lord Granville was content with M. Barthélémy Saint-Hilaire’s assurance, that “France never contemplated incurring the expense of constructing a harbour at Bizerta,” and limited his action to taking a note of the declaration. At the time I am writing, I learn that French engineers are busy with their plans on the site of Hippo Zarytus. The “near-future” will, however, evidently enable posterity to judge between Lord Granville and Mr. Guest.