In the early U.S., river travel was crucial to commerce and settlement. Cairo is located at the junction of two big waterways, the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers. I would have thought a settlement there would thrive. Any thoughts?
Thanks.
2006-09-23 09:53:27 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
The short answer is that there was no reason for river traffic to stop there.
Many cities are formed where cargo is *transferred* from one type of transport to another. This would explain cities like Chicago, where railroad cargo from the West was transferred to boats to sail on the Great Lakes. In New York and New Orleans, cargo is transferred from river (or canal) barges to ocean going ships.
In the case of Cairo, there was no reason to take the cargo off the river barges.
Another reason for the formation of cities is to serve as a market town; these types of towns will spring up to serve farming communities, but they cannot be too close to each other. If another market town has already been formed nearby, such as Charleston MO, then no new towns will grow nearby.
Other towns are formed because of their proximity to natural resources, such as mining towns. These towns may disappear and become ghost towns when the mines are tapped-out.
Still other towns are formed as trading posts or military forts; these towns also can disappear when the frontier moves. If there are farming or fishing resources nearby, these towns will not disappear.
In the case of Cairo, none of these reasons applied to allow a large city to grow.
2006-09-23 15:40:30 · answer #1 · answered by Tom D 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Although I think the answer concerning bridges is valid, I also think that the greater social structure of the city didn't allow it to be prosperous. Comparing cities like Cincinnati, Portsmouth, and Huntington-- the only one without a university ended up failing. And creating a college in 1980 is slowly allowing the town to rebound. Cairo didn't have a university like St. Louis or Cape Girardeau to add to the town's appeal.
2006-09-23 20:58:07 · answer #2 · answered by phdamy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
when the railroads replaced the rivers as the primary commercial conduit, the two big rivers that made Cairo a transportation center became a curse when it proved difficult and costly to bridge them.
No bridge, no railroad. No railroad, no commerce.
2006-09-23 17:08:21 · answer #3 · answered by blueprairie 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
For the period, it was thriving; however it's low and flooded often. Even now river boils are pushed up through the sandy soil making mounds in the middle of the streets, etc.
2006-09-23 21:18:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋