Earlier Panama Canal

In early 1533 Gaspar de Espinosa, the richest and most influential settler in Panama, suggested to the Council of the Indies that a Canal might be dug from Pacific to the Atlantic. It was proposed to be dug at the level of the river of Chagres, could this have been seriously attempted by the Spanish?

I am thinking that since the yearly tribute to the Spanish crown was 350,000 pesos a year perhaps if the Spanish never had to deal with wars in Northern Europe they could focus on the Indies including this canal. It would likely be done with an immense amount of slavery, probably imported from Africa.

It seems like this Canal would speed up the Manila trade galleons, perhaps resulting in less inflation in Europe, if more gold ends up in China. What else?
 

Well I'd suggest you read up on the technical and environmental difficulties of actually building the Panama canal, even before the Suez canal. It's not just a matter of money, also even given a Panama canal it was still more profitable to go East by sailing around Africa; the Pacific is nasty for sailboats. There needed a few dozen millions cubic meters of dirt and bedrock that needed to be removed, plus the corrosive environment, plus the rampant disease, plus the difficulty of labor.
 
Well I'd suggest you read up on the technical and environmental difficulties of actually building the Panama canal, even before the Suez canal. It's not just a matter of money, also even given a Panama canal it was still more profitable to go East by sailing around Africa; the Pacific is nasty for sailboats. There needed a few dozen millions cubic meters of dirt and bedrock that needed to be removed, plus the corrosive environment, plus the rampant disease, plus the difficulty of labor.
Nicaragua is slightly better, IIRC, but it's still a major, major undertaking.

I've got the Brits working on a Nicaragua canal in the 1840s, using steam technology a bit earlier than was done OTL for canals, but they haven't finished it yet. (mid1840s)
 

mowque

Banned
It was proposed to be dug at the level of the river of Chagres, could this have been seriously attempted by the Spanish?

No chance of success. You simply can't dig a sea level canal in Panama. The French tried OTL, lord knows they tried.
 
Well I'd suggest you read up on the technical and environmental difficulties of actually building the Panama canal, even before the Suez canal. It's not just a matter of money, also even given a Panama canal it was still more profitable to go East by sailing around Africa; the Pacific is nasty for sailboats. There needed a few dozen millions cubic meters of dirt and bedrock that needed to be removed, plus the corrosive environment, plus the rampant disease, plus the difficulty of labor.

Actually the Atlantic is harder to navigate. The Pacific got its name for a reason - the problem with the Pacific is its sheer size. It is nasty for sail boats because there is nowhere to dock and resupply between Acapulco and Manila (Hawaii is off course from the main wind currents, hence why the Spanish never cared for it).

Anyways, yeah at this point a canal across Panama is impossible, and rather impractical. It is still cheaper, and easier to sail around Africa. It could be interesting though to see a Nicaragua Canal dug up in the 1860s (much more possible). Or a railroad across Nicaragua or Tehuantepec in Mexico (easier than Panama because it is flat), as early as the 1830s. Development in Central America would seriously accelerate.
 
Funny the Chinese had the same circumstances building the Grand Canal and yet they succeeded.

Clearly you either have poor knowledge about the Grand Canal and/or the Panama canal. The Grand Canal was built in a heavily populated region with enough local produce and labor to maintain and supply, it wasn't isolated in the middle of a corrosive jungle environment with occasional landslides nor did it suffer from yellow fever or other epidemics. The rough elevation differences of the Grand Canal was 1-40 m from sea level through topsoil and sedimentary bedrock, unlike the volcanic bedrock in Panama which goes up to 120m above sea level.

I'd suggest you'd read up on the Grand Canal in addition to the Panama Canal before making more comments.
 
The 120m of rock is only if you follow the American route the French route is along sea level.
 

mowque

Banned
The 120m of rock is only if you follow the American route the French route is along sea level.

And what route goes from Atlantic Pacific at Sea Level? I'd be very curious to see it since it doesn't exist.
 
And what route goes from Atlantic Pacific at Sea Level? I'd be very curious to see it since it doesn't exist.

The one around the tip of South America that is 7500KM long.

But in all seriousness I'm getting tired of these one line statements that offer no supporting evidence or explanation beyond "I think it's right" .

Also Tobit you have it mixed up, you're thinking of the French proposal to dig a canal at sea level.
 
Last edited:

mowque

Banned
My source here says the French moved 19,000,000 cubic yards of earth.

To make the Canal that we know now the Americans had to remove 96,000,000 more!
 
My source here says the French moved 19,000,000 cubic yards of earth.

To make the Canal that we know now the Americans had to remove 96,000,000 more!

Well note that not all of the French excavations were used by the Americans. I'd have to check my sources but I'm not sure if 19mil was the amount removed by the French.
 
A few options: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_Canal


No annexation required, Nicaragua approached the U.S. about a canal in 1825, but Congress turned them down in 1826. Worried about instability and rivalry with Britain.

Nicaragua tried again in 1849 and went to Cornelius Vanderbilt and he actually set up a very profitable rail and stage line. The canal didn't get finished due to civil war in Nicaragua.
 
Top