The article was submitted by Wojciech Bosak, for the conference in Kraków as part of the Polish Presidency 2025.
In 1927, Professor Matakiewicz of the Lviv Polytechnic developed a project for the Baltic–Black Sea waterway. In an article published in Przegląd Techniczny in 1927, he indicated that this water connection would be the shortest in Europe, built in relatively favourable conditions, because the crossings of the watersheds between the Vistula and the Dniester, the Dniester and the Prut were relatively low. It could be used by vessels up to 1,200 tons with a draft of 1.8–2.0 m. The length of the entire Schiewenhorst (Gdańsk)–Sulina route covered 1894 km, including 1168 km within Poland and 726 km within Romania. The individual planned sections had the following lengths:
1. The Vistula between Gdańsk and the estuary of the San: 650 km;
2. San canalization to the estuary of the Vistula: 137.7 km;
3. San–Dniester canal: 110.7 km;
4. canalized Dniester from Rozwadów to Zaleszczyki: 269.6 km;
5. Dniester–Prut canal: 44.4 km;
6. Prut canalization from Chernivtsi to Skoljan: 288 km;
7. free Prut from Skoljan to the estuary of the Danube: 260 km;
8. Danube from the estuary of the Prut to Sulina: 134 km.
The San entered the discussed waterway for 137.7 km. The river was to be canalized to a minimum depth of 2.5 m. The cost of building the San–Dniester canal with a branch to Lviv was estimated at PLN 74.6 million. The canalization of the Dniester was to cost PLN 107.84 million. Professor Matakiewicz further proposed the Zaleszczyki–Kocman–Chernivtsi route. The cost of building the Dniester–Prut canal was to amount to PLN 44.4 million, while the Prut was to be canalized on the Chernivtsi–Skoljany section over a length of 288 km for PLN 115.2 million. This project was the subject of in-depth geopolitical analyses. Materials on this subject are located in the Archives of New Records of the archival group of the Polish Embassy in Bucharest. It was assumed that the Rhine–Main–Danube route and the Vistula–San–Dniester–Prut–Danube route would be axes, with the nature of transcontinental arteries. Germany’s plans concerned the creation of a compact communication system, uniting an area of about 1.5 million km2. The Rhine–Main–Danube Canal was planned to include the Danube–Thessaloniki Canal (via the Morava and Tomiki Vardar rivers) and the Oder–Danube connection (via the Prerov). According to Polish planners, the Vistula–San–Dniester–Prut–Danube artery is politically and economically better. It opened three further directions:
a) Sulina–Dardanelles, Mediterranean Sea;
b) Sulina–Samsun–then the Diyabakir–Mosul–Baghdad land route towards the Persian Gulf;
c) Braila and further by land to Bucharest–Thessaloniki.
It was also emphasized that the Vistula–San–Dniester–Prut connection has higher technical advantages compared to the Rhine–Main–Danube line. They resulted, among other things, from the comparison of the lengths of the routes and the heights that had to be overcome in both cases.
Vistula–San–Dniester–Prut: length 1894 km; elevation of the watershed above sea level 264 m.
Rhine–Main–Danube: length 3353 km; elevation of the watershed above sea level 405 m.
As a result, on the route passing through Poland it was necessary to reckon with the necessity of building 18 locks, while on the Rhine–Main–Danube route it was planned to build about 50 locks. Accordingly, not only the construction costs were higher, but also, to which special attention was paid, the operating costs. In addition, future branches were planned: Narew–Augustów Canal – Niemen–Dźwina (via the planned Niemen–Lake Narocz–Dzisna–Dźwina canal); west–east line: Warta–Noteć–Vistula–Bug–Royal Canal–Prypeć. It was also planned to extend the line to Dukla in the south or Klaipėda in the north.
Comparison of the discussed waterway with other waterways in Europe
On 21 March 1939, the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs received, among other things, a table comparing the planned Baltic–Black Sea waterway via the Vistula–San–Dniester–Prut–Danube with other waterways in Europe. It was as follows (lengths and elevations given in km):
1. Baltic–Black Sea via Vistula–San–Dniester–Prut–Danube (length 1894; elevation 264)
2. Baltic–Black Sea via Vistula–San–Dniester (length 2120; elevation 264)
3. North Sea–Black Sea via Elbe–Pardubice–Přerov–Danube (length 2900; elevation 370)
4. Baltic–Black Sea via Oder–Bohumín–Přerov–Danube (length 2650; elevation 265)
5. Baltic–Black Sea via Vistula–Bug–Royal Canal–Prypeć–Dnieper (length 2500; elevation 142)
6. Baltic–Black Sea via Neman–King’s Canal Oginski–Pripyat–Dnieper (length 2400; elevation 156)
7. Baltic–Black Sea via Dvina–Berezynski Canal–Dnieper (length 2490; elevation 164)
8. North Sea–Black Sea via Rhine–Main–Danube (length 3353; elevation 405)
9. Rhine–Main–Danube (length 3435; elevation 559)
It is worth paying attention to the currently preferred Rhine–Main–Danube waterway connection in the TEN-T network, which is to receive huge funding.
Author: Wojciech Bosak
This is a fragment of the article Waterway Baltic – Black Sea (Vistula-San-Dniestr-Prut-Danube) published in Polish on the website https://www.zegluga-rzeczna.pl/articles/498/droga-wodna-baltyk-morze-czarne-wisla-san-dniestr-prut-dunaj