South Italy Castles and Coastal Towers

The History of Coastal Towers goes hand in hand the political and military evolution of the Kingdom of Naples. Fortifications were built in Southern Italy over and eight-hundred-year period from the 9^th to the 17^th centuries. The original towers were cylindrical in shape, tall and with small windows. Their main function was to sound the alarm when pirate ships were sighted through the lightning of fires, allowing the local population to find shelter into the hills and grottoes inland from the coast.

Increased Raids during the 16^th Century led to Development of More Complex Coastal Defenses

Naples Viceroy Don Pedro of Toledo ordered the construction of massive, square-shaped towers with thicker external walls. The transition from circular-shaped towers to square-shaped ones was spurred by the introduction of artillery requiring fortifications whose functions now included sighting, signaling, shelter as well as the use of offensive weapons that could hit a ship approaching the coast.

Communications were carried out through a series of visual signals - smoke in the daytime, fires by night as well as acoustic signals such as bells, or shots from a cannon or arquebus, a precursor of the rifle. When a pirate ship was sighted from one tower, one of these signals would be used to warn the people of the area to prepare to fight or flee. The signal would be passed from tower to tower, up and down the coast, passing the word quickly and effectively. The ground level floor had no windows and was set directly above a large cistern to guarantee a constant water supply. This space was used to store food and munitions and also contained a millstone for grinding wheat, making the tower self-sufficient.

Saracen Towers can be viewed along the Southern Italian coastline from Gaeta to the Sorrento peninsula, the Amalfi and Cilento coasts. There are over 350 towers, including 30 along the coastal strip from Vietri sul Mare to Positano. Some have been restored and incorporated into modern buildings in small harbors such as San Marco, Pisciotta and Marina di Camerota. Further south, around Cape Infreschi just before reaching Scario, there are cliffs along the coast unreachable by road; here the original coastal towers stand just a few hundred yards apart.

The Term Saracen has shifted over time. Ptolemy's Geography from the second century mentions Sarakene as a region in the northern Sinai Peninsula and refers to a people called the Sarakenoi. For Italians during the middle ages it meant Muslim invader, from the Arabs who rode the initial wave of Islamic expansion into Spain and Sicily in the 8^th and 9^thcenturies to the Ottoman Turks who took Constantinople in the 15^th century.

Coastal Watchtowers were also as a point of reference for friendly ships. The towers were generally manned by a military team of four guards and a horseman, who often remained outside the tower ready to ride into town to carry a warning as soon as possible.

Ships, Captains and Leaders

Crisis, Accountability and Responsibility

This is the story of two ships, their masters and how they reacted in the aftermath of a mishap. You have heard of the Costa Concordia; a ship with state-of-the-art navigation and communications technology. The other ship was a 1637 ton sailing barque that lost all its masts in a storm off the Falkland Islands in December 1905.

So, at face value nothing in common; different times and ships, part of the world as well as type and cause of the accident.  Even the ending is different: the sailing ships managed to limp into Montevideo harbor after 46 days with its valuable cargo of nitrates intact.

What they have in common are the culture, values and traditions of the two masters and crews. So, how could their behavior and performance after their respective mishaps have been so different.

There are of course many reasons but the one that is key is the role of a ship’s captain, and for that matter any business or government leader, in the 21^st century compared to 100 years ago.

Today a ship and its captain are pretty much on automatic pilot; in fact, many decisions are made off the ship in an office somewhere where “managers” decide on a course of action. While maintaining objective responsibility, a captain is reduced to a mere figurehead.

The captain of that other ship was the ultimate decision maker. He had no choice, being so far away from home and for long periods of time. He and the ship owner shared in the risk and responsibility as well as in the rewards in the event of a successful voyage. In other words: total accountability!

Technical issues aside, this could be a determining factor in the performance aboard ship and in the conduct of a business, a government or a nonprofit institution.

A century ago the captain had every incentive to perform. He also had total responsibility and the unconditional allegiance of the crew; the ultimate team effort with a clear leader! Today’s captains are salaried employees. Nothing wrong with a salaried employee but who are the real de-facto captains of today’s ships? The implication is that today’s highly trained and sophisticated managers do not take responsibility by design. They have a job to do and they do it extremely well. Under this scenario, when something goes wrong it is difficult to establish accountability and assign responsibility. More importantly, it takes a long time to determine the causes of a problem and make the necessary adjustments.

Systems with diffused power and limited liability have major advantages but, as with the economic crisis of the last several years, they also lead to disasters with long term consequences for everyone.

Note: The captain of the sailing ship was this writer’s grandfather.