Maritime Culture in the Netherlands: accessing the late medieval maritime cultural landscapes of the north‐eastern Zuiderzee
2018; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 48; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/1095-9270.12333
ISSN1095-9270
AutoresYftinus van Popta, Christer Westerdahl, Brad Duncan,
ResumoThis paper examines the theory and practice of the maritime cultural landscape in general, and projects the theoretical concepts and aspects involved on the highly dynamic late medieval north-eastern Zuiderzee region in the Netherlands. The cultivation of land and marine erosion (floods and rising sea level) are considered as the main factors that caused the transformation of the physical landscape of this region from peatlands with freshwater basins into a tidal lagoon. As a consequence, multiple settlements drowned, large areas of land submerged, and culture and the landscape gradually became more maritime, giving the research area a cultural identity and dimension. Cultura marítima en los Países Bajos (Holanda): acceso al paisaje cultural marítimo medieval tardío del nordeste de Zuiderzee Este artículo examina la teoría y práctica del paisaje cultural marítimo en general y proyecta los conceptos teóricos y aspectos involucrados en la región medieval tardía altamente dinámica del nordeste de Zuiderzee en los Países Bajos. El cultivo de la tierra y la erosión marina (inundaciones y aumento del nivel del mar) son considerados como los principales factores que causaron la transformación del paisaje físico de esta región de turberas con cuencas de agua dulce en lagunas mareales. Como consecuencia, múltiples asentamientos se anegaron; extensas áreas de tierra se sumergieron y la cultura y el paisaje gradualmente se hicieron más marítimos, lo que le concede al área de estudio una identidad y una dimensión cultural. Palabras clave: paisaje cultural marítimo, enfoque interdisciplinario, asentamientos anegados, erosión marítima, Noordoostpolder, Periodo Medieval Tardío, cambios en el nivel del mar 荷兰的海洋文化:探访须德海东北部中世纪晚期海洋文化景观 本文综合分析海洋文化景观的理论与实践, 并将理论概念用于荷兰中世纪晚期高度活跃的须德海东北部地区的研究。土地耕种与海洋侵蚀 (洪水和海平面上升) 被认为是导致该地区自然景观从淡水泥炭盆地转变为潮汐泻湖的主要原因。其结果是多个定居点被淹没, 大片土地沉浸, 文化及自然景观都逐渐变得更加海洋化, 这也成为了该研究区域的文化特征与维度。 关键词: 海洋文化景观, 跨学科方法, 被淹没的定居点, 海洋侵蚀, 东北圩田, 中世纪晚期, 海平面变化 荷蘭的海洋文化:探訪須德海東北部中世紀晚期海洋文化景觀 本文綜合分析海洋文化景觀的理論與實踐, 並將理論概念用于荷蘭中世紀晚期高度活躍的須德海東北部地區的研究。土地耕種與海洋侵蝕 (洪水和海平面上升) 被認為是導致該地區自然景觀從淡水泥炭盆地轉變爲潮汐瀉湖的主要原因。其結果是多個定居點被淹沒, 大片土地沉浸, 文化及自然景觀都逐漸變得更加海洋化, 這也成爲了該研究區域的文化特征與維度。 關鍵詞: 海洋文化景觀, 跨學科方法, 被淹沒的定居點, 海洋侵蝕, 東北圩田, 中世紀晚期, 海平面變化 For a long time, archaeological studies were too narrowly focused on terrestrial archaeology, often ignoring the potential importance of maritime archaeology (Maarleveld, 1998: 48; Flatman, 2003: 144). The discipline had a relatively small number of active maritime scholars and was still perceived to be engaged in antiquarianism (Muckelroy, 1978: 4; Gibbins and Adams, 2001: 279; Flatman, 2003: 143). There has been recent motivation, over the past decade or so, to move forwards, expanding the focus of maritime archaeological studies to examine the wider significance of shipwrecks within their social and cultural contexts (for example Westerdahl, 2017: 3). The international development of maritime archaeology has differed, however, from its development in the Netherlands, with the latter somewhat lagging behind. Despite the strong historic and modern maritime character of the Netherlands, maritime archaeology has even become a threatened research specialty. There are still plenty of maritime archaeological studies being conducted, but the majority are particularly focused on shipwrecks. There is no doubt that shipwrecks are of great importance as archaeological sources, but they have too often been documented as isolated and particularist objects, with a focus on the tangible: the wreck (wood) and its inventory, without considering their historical, political, social, and geographical context. There is an urgent need for new interdisciplinary approaches in modern maritime research in the Netherlands: instead of studying ships as precious and technologically significant artefacts, these materials should be used to understand the societies that created them (Flatman, 2003: 143). Much more should be done with the large amounts of data generated by Dutch maritime research, wreck contexts should be assessed and synthesized and integrated with data from terrestrial archaeology. This would improve maritime archaeological explanation and theory and open up ways to reconnect and restore balance between Dutch and international developments on the one hand, and terrestrial and maritime archaeology on the other. The maritime cultural landscape (MCL) is a theoretical concept with a profound impact on maritime archaeology that promotes an interdisciplinary approach (Westerdahl, 1992: 6; Firth, 1995: 5). The concept has great utility when applied to one of the most important Dutch maritime landscape regions: that of the Zuiderzee (Southern Sea). The aim of this article is to investigate the theory and practice of the maritime cultural landscape using the theoretical approach proposed by Westerdahl (1992; 2011; 2013), thereby exploring ways to examine the maritime cultural landscapes of the north-eastern Zuiderzee, primarily in the period AD 1100–1400. It demonstrates how maritime cultural landscape elements (material and immaterial), previously proposed by others, can be applied directly to investigate the region of study. Hereto, a multidisciplinary approach is proposed that integrates and compares pertinent yet seldom-used historical, geological, geographical, and (maritime) archaeological data sources from the Zuiderzee. Changing the focus from object- and shipwreck-orientated maritime archaeological studies to more integrated studies of the maritime cultural landscape forms the core of the present study.11 The current study based on Van Popta's PhD thesis that focuses on the interrelationships between landscape development (geomorphology), occupation (eroded settlements, lost islands), shipping (wrecks) and the socio-economic background. The current study aims to: 1) reconstruct the physical maritime landscape of the region; and 2) characterize the unrecognized maritime remains (such as submerged settlements) in the region. Only then, the late medieval maritime cultural landscapes of the north-eastern Zuiderzee region will be perceived in the most accurate way (see for example Van Popta, 2016; 2018). When focusing on the history of the Netherlands, one cannot deny that the Dutch had (and have) a true love-hate relationship with water. The Dutch love for water is mainly based on using water for a transportation network, as a source of wealth and power. For a century and a half, the Dutch dominated world trade and were considered as the leading sea power in Europe. This period started in the late 16th century and lasted until the early 18th century and is known as the 'Dutch Golden Age' (Israel, 1990: 15; Gaastra, 2009: 17). One might imagine that Dutch wealth was primarily provided by their most famous commercial institution: the Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie (VOC or Dutch East India Company). While it is true that the Company brought great wealth and power to the Low Countries, the main sources for economic hegemony were their preponderant influence in the Baltic trade, the unique methods of shipbuilding, the systems of ship ownership, and a highly developed system of inland shipping (De Vries, 1976: 117; Israel, 1989: 48, 408–410; Van Holk, 2017: 75). The geographical location of the Dutch Republic in the north-western tip of the European mainland was also considered to be a considerable advantage, connecting the Atlantic, Baltic, and the West-European hinterland via the Rhine and Meuse rivers. The national waters of the Netherlands (including many lakes, rivers, and their tributaries), functioned as the most important transportation network of people and merchandise for many centuries. Many of the transport routes led into a large inlet of the North Sea in the central part of the Netherlands that separated the Dutch lands in the north, east, south, and west (Fig. 1). The waters of this region were referred to as the Zuiderzee and were considered the most important Dutch traffic junction in Medieval and Early Modern periods (see for example Van Popta, 2012; 2017b; Van Popta and Van Holk, 2018). The literal translation of the Dutch word Nederland is 'Lowland' and underlines the vulnerable location of the country on the borders of the North Sea, and how Dutch hatred of the sea also comes into play. Large parts of the Dutch countryside lie below sea level and were regularly flooded in the past. From the Iron Age onwards, as a first form of protection against the water, people started to live on artificial mounds called terpen (see for example Nicolay, 2010; Nieuwhof, 2016). Then, in the late Middle Ages, dykes were built along large parts of the Dutch coastline, providing supplementary and better protection against regular floods for the increased population of the Netherlands. However, the first dykes did not constitute an efficient barrier against the many heavy storm floods that scourged the land from the 12th century onwards (for example Gottschalk, 1971; Buisman, 1995; Jongmans et al., 2013: 682; Van den Biggelaar et al., 2014; Pierik et al., 2016: 10). Residents of the coastal zones were struck hard by the many floods, as cultivated land was washed away, complete settlements were inundated and thousands of people died. In order to win the battle against the water, drastic measures were undertaken, leading to the construction of the Zuiderzee Works in the first half of the 20th century and the Delta Works in the second half of the 20th century—dams, storm surge barriers, sluices, and dykes. In AD 1932, the Zuiderzee was artificially separated from the North Sea by the construction of a 32km-long closure dam (Afsluitdijk; Fig. 2). A considerable part of the former sea was then reclaimed and put to use as arable fields. This new land is now known as the province of Flevoland. This unique piece of land, also known as both the largest artificial island in the world by land reclamation (Eastern and Southern Flevoland) and as the largest ship's graveyard on land in the world, is the main subject of this study. The northern part of Flevoland, known as the Noordoostpolder, is especially of interest as it contains clear evidence of the dynamic battle the Dutch have fought against the water (see for example Wiggers, 1955; Van der Heide, 1965; Van Popta, 2017a). Interest in maritime archaeology originated in the 15th century and was initially driven by the curiosity of antiquarians. The first scientific considerations date back to the beginning of the 19th century but were not yet related to archaeology, for example, Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology (1832), in which he used shipwrecks to date the youngest geological deposits (Muckelroy, 1978: 11). They focused mainly on shipwrecks from an economic/salvage perspective. The first systematic and disciplined academic studies appeared in the late 19th century in Scandinavia, Switzerland, and Great Britain (Muckelroy, 1978: 11–12; Bass, 2013: 5). The methodological standard of underwater archaeological fieldwork was, however, by no means comparable with terrestrial investigations. Technological innovations in the first half of the 20th century, such as airlifts and the aqualung, improved the ability to excavate under water (Tuddenham, 2010: 6). As a result, many wrecks were explored in a more systematic way, but a theoretical foundation was missing and the particularist focus remained (Muckelroy, 1978: 10). Many scholars (for example Bass, 1966; Kuhn, 1970; Muckelroy, 1978; McGrail, 1984; Gibbins, 1990; Gibbins and Adams, 2001; Flatman, 2003; Delgado and Staniforth, 2009; Tuddenham, 2010; Bass, 2013) have recognized the need for the theorization of maritime archaeology and the need to move away from a particularist/material culture-driven approach to one that examines the wider contextualized significance of maritime cultural heritage sites. The work of Keith Muckelroy, Maritime Archaeology (1978), which is considered as the most important single statement of method and theory in the discipline 'maritime archaeology' (Gibbins and Adams, 2001: 284), should be mentioned: Muckelroy focused on site-formation processes of wreck-sites, interpretative methodologies carried out in a scientific and analytic manner, and provided the academic world with a holistic definition of maritime archaeology: 'the scientific study of the material remains of man and his activity on the sea' (Muckelroy, 1978: 4, 160–165; Tuddenham 2010: 7). …the whole network of sailing routes, with ports, havens and harbours along the coast, and its related constructions and other remains of human activity, underwater as well as terrestrial. (Westerdahl 1992: 6) This concept proved very important for the development of, at any rate, a significant part of maritime archaeology because it shows how large a range of data archaeologists can exploit in their studies of human relation to the sea. The discipline moved to a more holistic understanding of the relation between maritime and terrestrial counterparts, not solely concentrating on shipwrecks and the seabed, and requiring an interdisciplinary approach (Tuddenham, 2010: 8). Furthermore, the maritime cultural landscape approach turned out to be suitable for spatial research instead of only studying individual sites or major excavations (for example Bannerman and Jones 1999; Parker, 1999; Baron, 2008; Pollard, 2008). It focuses not only on the physical remains of maritime cultures, but also on cultural practices, cognitive systems, and toponyms. All these aspects have clear relationships with each other and the landscape to which they belong. Westerdahl has refined his definition of the maritime cultural landscape over the past 25 years, but many scholars still use the definition of the concept as it was published in 1992. Studying the maritime cultural landscape often starts from a landscape perspective. Even when a single shipwreck is examined, the changing environment of a wreck-site could lead to the consideration of the landscape. Apart from examining the ship construction and creating reconstructions, focus should be on the location of the wreck-site by conducting archaeobotanical, geomorphological, geological, and dendrochronological research, making the landscape a salient factor in maritime and nautical archaeology (Törnqvist, 2013: 28; Westerdahl, 2015: 229). The quote 'man in landscape—landscape in man' (Löfgren, 1981; Westerdahl, 1992: 5) could also be applied to wrecks: 'a wreck in landscape—the landscape in a wreck'. This landscape exists at the intersection of culture and space and is related to multiple disciplines such as archaeology, history, and geography (Ford, 2011: 1); however, one should not confuse the landscape with terms such as 'land', 'nature' or 'space' (Ingold, 1993: 153). There are, many interpretations of the concept, depending on the perspective from which it is analysed and for what purpose: a landscape can, for example, be experienced, painted, studied, seen, or remembered. When studied, the approach and interpretation of the concept differs with each discipline. Even from an archaeological point-of-view only, there is wide variation in uses and definitions (Anschuetz et al., 2001: 158). Ingold describes the landscape as 'the world as it is known to those who dwell therein, who inhabit its places and journey along the paths connecting them' (Ingold, 1993: 156). Gosden and Head (1994: 114) state that human action/culture creates landscape, and landscape then shapes human action. Significantly, Anschuetz et al. (2001: 161, 190) define the landscape as 'a mirror of a community' or an 'arena of a community's activities'. Ford (2001: 4) summarizes a landscape as the physical environment perceptible to an individual and his or her perception of that environment. Duncan (2006: 7) considers the landscape as an arena within which a group's cultural interaction with the environment, other individuals and communities define and redefine cultural identity and practices and vice versa. These multiple definitions share an important perception: 'landscape' suggests the presence and/or influence of people. One could say that all landscapes are experienced culturally and therefore all are cultural in nature (Jasinski, 1999: 17; Duncan, 2006: 15). The above-mentioned cultural landscape concept definitions are derived from archaeological studies that apply these concepts appropriately. However, the number of (maritime) cultural landscape studies increased from the 1990s, leading to a corruption of these concepts as a result of a lack of their definition in many of these studies. Recent works on maritime landscapes, such as The Archaeology of Maritime Landscapes edited by Ford (2011) and Ships and Maritime Landscapes edited by Gawronski et al. (2017) contain some articles that claim to target the maritime (cultural) landscape, but might more accurately be termed regional archaeological studies. So, what does it take to truly examine the maritime cultural landscape? First, the maritime cultural landscape encompasses both physical (material) remains and cognitive (social and metaphysical) aspects (Duncan, 2006: 13). Studies that only target material (archaeological) remains of the maritime cultural landscape should be termed as maritime archaeological landscape studies, rather than maritime cultural landscape studies. Originally, however, the definition of the maritime cultural landscape was exclusively focused on material remains (Westerdahl, 1978), as a way of protecting physical aspects of maritime cultural heritage without analysing them (Westerdahl, 1994: 266). Westerdahl soon adapted his definition stating that 'a natural way of discovering the maritime cultural landscape is by way of the cognitive perspective of local tradition', comprising an approach including immaterial and material aspects (Westerdahl, 1992: 5–6). Second, and related to the first point, an interdisciplinary set of data sources is needed to apply the concept. One should not only use archaeological sources (material, spatial), but also historical, geological, geomorphological and cartographic data sets, and consult ethnography, folklore and oral history (Duncan, 2006: 19; Duncan and Gibbs, 2015: 27). It is here where a distinction can be made between the concept of maritime landscape and the concept of maritime cultural landscape. The first can be studied within different disciplines based on physical areas or regions, but the latter is bound to an interdisciplinary perspective based on cultural and social aspects of the people being studied. This should lead to a holistic representation of the maritime cultural landscape: incorporating every aspect of culture and its material expression (Westerdahl, 2017: 7). Approaching the concept holistically also has disadvantages: it can cause the methodology to become vague, making it applicable to almost everything; however, it goes against the ambiguous nature of the concept to work with just one accepted approach (Duncan, 2006: 37). Instead, the methodology used should be clearly defined and the implicated aspects of each research project specified. The perception that landscapes are continuous and in a constant state of change is certainly appropriate for the Zuiderzee area in the Netherlands. It might be hard to accept that the modern polders, with their large farms and open fields, were once controlled by the Zuiderzee, with its tiny islands and wooden ships, but both must be considered parts of the same cultural landscape. When this observation encourages a detailed study of the region, the connection between the past and present situations becomes clearer. Many present-day material and intangible remains—such as pottery sherds, bricks, and toponyms—testify to past maritime cultural landscapes. The maritime cultural landscape of the Zuiderzee region is multivalent not singular. There are many perceptions of any particular area or region, now and in the past, that occupy different areas of time and space (Duncan, 2006: 17). But what does happen when the physical maritime landscape is reconstructed by modern archaeologists in a specific region for a specific period, such as the late medieval north-eastern Zuiderzee? In this case, the maritime cultural landscapes of the inhabitants of this region evolved as the environment around them was artificially changed. We refer to this as the late medieval perception of the maritime cultural landscape of the north-eastern Zuiderzee. It would be hard to recognize the north-eastern Zuiderzee region of the late Middle Ages in its modern-day appearance (Fig. 3). The sea dominated the north-west, whereas it was artificially controlled in the north-eastern part of the region. There was a coastal zone stretching from the north via the east to the south, with small settlements close to water, but protected by small dykes. A journey along this coastal peat area would have led through the small settlements of (from north to south) Lemmer, Kuinrezijl, Kuinre, Blankenham, the small chapel of Baarlo, the first houses of what would become Blokzijl, and finally Vollenhove (Fig. 4). To the south of Vollenhove, the IJssel River discharged into the Zuiderzee with a rapidly expanding delta (Cohen et al., 2009: 90–92). About 6km upstream on the IJssel River, the largest and most influential town within the research area, Kampen, could be found. A peat peninsula stretched westwards of Kuinre into the sea and contained several more settlements, of which Veenhuizen is the only one recognized by name (Van Popta, 2017a: 135). From the most western point of the peninsula, multiple islands must have been visible on the horizon, of which Urk was the largest and the only one that is still present. This is due to its Pleistocene boulder-clay base, which has withstood the eroding power of the Zuiderzee (Geurts, 2005: 18). The other islands, no more than vestiges of the peatlands that once covered the whole region, housed small settlements that were taken by the sea at the end of the late Middle Ages. Nowadays, only some disturbed remnants, such as pottery sherds and bricks, have been found in the Noordoostpolder soil that testify to these once-inhabited islands. One peat island did survive the eroding power of the Zuiderzee: Schokland. The island can be found between Urk and Vollenhove and is now a UNESCO world heritage site. Its present shape, a thin north-south orientated piece of land, is but a small reflection of its late medieval size, which once stretched much further to the west and south. Archaeological research has proven that the inhabitants of Schokland Island lived on small artificial mounds (for example Geurts, 1999; Van Popta and Aalbersberg, 2016). The northern part of the island was called Emmeloord and the southern part was known as Ens. The late medieval habitation on the island was not concentrated in just one spot, but could be found all along the sheltered eastern side of the island. Recent research has proven that the northern part of the island was also relatively densely populated, and might be related to the historical toponym of Maanhuizen, of which the part huizen (houses) refers to the presence of a settlement (Van Popta and Aalbersberg, 2016; Van Popta, 2017a). In no more than a few centuries, most of the peatlands in the north-eastern Zuiderzee region disappeared entirely. The islands Urk and Schokland were drastically reduced in size, leading to limited possible habitation sites, while the other islands, the peninsula and the coastal zone were completely washed away (Fig. 4). Based on historical maps, it is estimated that the Zuiderzee gained and maintained a more-or-less stable area after AD 1600, although small-scale land erosion continued until the large-scale reclamations of the 20th century. There are multiple theoretical concepts that can be associated with the maritime cultural landscape, although the application of some is time-bound and historical in nature. An overview is presented here of the most relevant concepts and aspects that are related to the late medieval Zuiderzee region. One way of defining maritime culture is by comparing it with inland (agrarian) culture; one should be conceptually different from the other. Maritime culture requires a relationship between humans and the sea, in which water can be considered both as a resource and as a barrier or a threat (Washburn and Lancaster, 1968: 294; Erlandson, 2001: 288; Westerdahl, 2013: 745). Using the water as a resource can require aquatic adaptations, often depending on local traditions and related to the usage of boats (Westerdahl, 1992: 5). However, agriculture was also part of the landscape: it is unlikely that past maritime cultures were fully dependent on marine resources and instead also took advantage of agricultural resources (Duncan, 2006: 298; Westerdahl, 2013: 744). The counterpart is also unlikely, that is agrarian coastal communities that completely depended on agricultural resources. When projecting these assumptions onto the late medieval north-eastern Zuiderzee region, it becomes clear that the islands in the study area were also dependent on both types of resources: the remnants of medieval land parcels (ditches) on the islands testify to agricultural use, while the presence of harbours and the wrecks of fishing vessels and cargo vessels prove 'the use of the sea' (in Swedish sjöbruk or in Dutch zeegebruik, a term invented by the Swedish maritime ethnologist Olof Hasslöf) (Figs 5 and 6). Concentrations of material remains and relevant toponyms that (for example) refer to settlements, harbours, or sea ports should be interpreted as 'centres' (Westerdahl, 2013: 738). The north-eastern Zuiderzee region contains multiple examples of these maritime cultural centres, of which some are still preserved, such as Lemmer, Vollenhove, and Kampen, while others have completely eroded away and are only known from historical sources, such as Nagele and Marcnesse. As a result of the reclamation of the Zuiderzee and the construction of the Noordoostpolder, the shoreline shifted almost 15km to the west. This caused many of the remaining settlements to lose their status as maritime coastal centres and their maritime functions, although in some cases the maritime identity remains. Urk is a good example of a maritime cultural centre that refused to give up its identity, despite the surroundings changing drastically. The island is now part of the mainland, with forest and meadows on its northern and eastern side, whereas the western and southern sections now border a lake instead of a sea (Fig. 7). Urk is nevertheless still an active fishing community, with a fishing fleet that now operates on the North Sea (Geurts, 2005). One can still experience the distinct behaviour and culture of the community when visiting Urk as the settlement radiates seclusion and its inhabitants cherish their dialect and customs. This is illustrated, for example, by the fact that one should not say 'I am in Urk'. Instead, 'I am on Urk' is used, as when Urk was still an island. The words of Greverus (1999: 63) are especially suited to describing Urk: 'it takes a long time before one can become an "islander", if it happens at all'. Urk should therefore be considered a cultural island, even though its physical appearance is no longer that of an island. Maritime cultural areas are zones with distinct maritime cultural characteristics that supersede other borders and can be distinguished by elements such as settlement structures, boatbuilding traditions, ship types, and place names (Westerdahl, 2013: 738). The Zuiderzee region should not be interpreted as just one distinct maritime cultural area, despite many similarities between the different parts of the region, with regard to social behaviour (mentality) and character of the multiple maritime centres. However, when focusing on the region, differences in maritime culture are visible between its different parts. For example, the northern part of Schokland Island, Emmeloord (Fig. 3), at first belonged to the bishop of Utrecht, as recorded in 13th-century historical charters, and was ruled by the Lords of Kuinre in the first half of the 14th century. The southern part of the island, Ens, is not mentioned in the historical charters and may have developed separately from Emmeloord, although sharing the same island territory. Especially during the 16th century, the division between the southern and northern halves of Schokland was accentuated, with the northern side remaining Catholic and focused on Amsterdam; whereas the southern part joined the Reformation, became Protestant, and focused mainly on Kampen and the east shore (Van Hezel and Pol, 2008: 64). The traditional zones of transport geography are also known as transport zones (Westerdahl, 2013: 748). These zones need cognitive recognition in order to exist, and can be visualized in a spatial and archaeological way. A transport zone does not equate to a single path or a coastal sailing route, instead a transport zone is revealed by distinct relationships between multiple aspects such as place names, vessel designs and their adaptations—such as flat-bottomed for shallow waters—shipping systems, the character of coastal settlements, and vocabulary (see also: Westerdahl, 1998; Duncan, 2006: 28; Westerdahl, 2013: 747–748; Caporaso, 2017: 8). Transport zones, to a large extent, are influenced by the borders of maritime cultural areas and vice versa. Westerdahl, therefore, divided transport zones into seven different types that can overlap and interconnect (Westerdahl, 2000; 2013). In this case, the north-eastern Zuiderzee region should be treated as the fifth type: an estuary lagoon zone, connecting the North Sea to the Dutch, Belgium and German hinterland (Westerdahl, 2000: 15; Westerdahl, 2013: 749). The region connects with zones based on river valleys (such as the IJssel River) and the coast
Referência(s)