PC: Ottoman Suez Canal

Was a canal linking the lower Nile to the Red Sea via the Bitter Lakes possible using 16th-century technology?

I realize that the Ancient Egyptians managed it, but the Nile in the 16th century was different from the Nile in the 1st millennium BC, so I'm not sure if the ancient example is still applicable. Additionally, there were three attempts to build a Suez Canal in Ottoman Egypt during the 16th century, but they all went nowhere because of technical issues (sand, possibility of sea water entering the Nile, etc).

What I want to know if the challenges really were insurmountable for a canal in the 1570s or so, or if it was just a case of the Porte not trying hard enough and jumping too easily to the conclusion that a canal was impossible.
 
From a technical standpoint, nothing was stopping them. It was expensive, but within the resources of pretty much every major empire that ruled Egypt to accomplish.
 
The problem is, of course, why would they?

Canals not only cost money to build, they need regular maintenance, so there has to be a REASON for them to do it.

It could be military - if the Ottomans had a much larger Red Sea/Indian Ocean presence, and wanted to be able to shift ships back and forth between there and the Med it would make some sense.
But. Ships suited for the Med are rarely suited for the greater oceans outside - so even if the Ottomans DID have a two sea navy, they might very well be two different navies.

Also, what lure is going to get the Ottomans to invest heavily enough to build that Indian Ocean presence?


Commercial reasons are unlikely. Merchant ships are sail powered (it costs way to much for oarsmen), while trips up and down Nile branches and the Red Sea are not very amenable to that. (The Nile itself, that's not so much a problem, you have the wind blow you upstream, and then float back down on the current.)

Also, the Italians own most of the Mediterranean trade (iOTL) and Arabs and others the Indian Ocean trade. If the only thing the Ottomans really control is the transIsthmus trade - well, they do that now with camels, without a massive investment of money.


So. It's technically quite feasible. Economically not, almost certainly. Strategically improbable, but not impossible. IMO.
 
A cheaper and more feasible solution would be to reopen the Canal of the Pharaohs connecting the Nile and Red Sea. Boats sail up the Nile and then down the canal to the sea.
 
It could be military - if the Ottomans had a much larger Red Sea/Indian Ocean presence, and wanted to be able to shift ships back and forth between there and the Med it would make some sense.
But. Ships suited for the Med are rarely suited for the greater oceans outside - so even if the Ottomans DID have a two sea navy, they might very well be two different navies.

Also, what lure is going to get the Ottomans to invest heavily enough to build that Indian Ocean presence?
Well, as I said in OP, this idea was not infrequently raised in the Porte and actually seriously attempted a few times, although they were eventually abortive. I don't have my main source (The Ottoman Age of Exploration) with me, but as I recall it reasons raised included both commercial (greater facility for the transport of merchandise between Constantinople and the Indian Ocean) and military (not just Med ships to India, but timber which the Red Sea fleet was always short of).

Also where are you getting the idea that the Ottomans (of course including Arab subjects) weren't heavily involved in the Indian Ocean trade?
 
The Canal of the Pharaohs would be cheaper and less time-consuming to reopen and probably just as useful for Ottoman needs.
 
The statement relies on What Happened IOTL...

...The Ottomans tended to be derivative, like modern Russia - wait till someone else works the bugs out of a new idea, then acquire it if reasonably useful. The Isthmus of Suez had the merit of (a) being a land bridge used by the followers of Mohammed and (b) preventing maritime nations in Western Europe from entering the Red Sea and sailing to the Indies.

Controlling the Silk and Spice trade made the rulers of Egypt rich. Why change something that works, when it might bring hostile troublemakers near Mecca?
 
..The Isthmus of Suez had the merit of (a) being a land bridge used by the followers of Mohammed and (b) preventing maritime nations in Western Europe from entering the Red Sea and sailing to the Indies.
a) A land bridge hinders the facility of commerce, and a canal is just as controllable as an isthmus. That's why they built the canal in the first place.
b) This was an OTL objection to the canal plans, but the response was that Western Europeans (Portuguese) had already reached the Red Sea by other means so that wasn't a good objection.
 
The Canal of the Pharaohs would be cheaper and less time-consuming to reopen and probably just as useful for Ottoman needs.

The Canal of the Pharaohs was built for Ancient Egyptian vessels however, which are much smaller and displace a lot less water than 19th and 20th-century transport and naval ships, and before that the big galleons and carracks that you started to see in the Age of Exploration. It's really just not as viable for the era in which the Ottomans would be even considering this sort of thing (i.e. when the Mamelukes have been defeated as a power and the Ottoman Empire's status cemented as the premier power of the Arabian Peninsula and the Levant).

Honestly, this sort of project would be a huge risk for the Ottomans, not just because of financial and logistical issues, but because building something like the Suez Canal pretty much paints a huge target on Ottoman Egypt that says "please conquer me to assure safe passage to the East Indies," beyond that it directly threatens the very lucrative Ottoman monopoly on trade with the East. And this sort of thing is an experience the Ottomans are very aware of past a certain point: the various capitulations that the Ottoman Empire was forced into by the Western powers were extremely damaging to the empire's finances as well as to its sovereignty.
 
The Canal of the Pharaohs was built for Ancient Egyptian vessels however, which are much smaller and displace a lot less water than 19th and 20th-century transport and naval ships, and before that the big galleons and carracks that you started to see in the Age of Exploration. It's really just not as viable for the era in which the Ottomans would be even considering this sort of thing (i.e. when the Mamelukes have been defeated as a power and the Ottoman Empire's status cemented as the premier power of the Arabian Peninsula and the Levant).

Honestly, this sort of project would be a huge risk for the Ottomans, not just because of financial and logistical issues, but because building something like the Suez Canal pretty much paints a huge target on Ottoman Egypt that says "please conquer me to assure safe passage to the East Indies," beyond that it directly threatens the very lucrative Ottoman monopoly on trade with the East. And this sort of thing is an experience the Ottomans are very aware of past a certain point: the various capitulations that the Ottoman Empire was forced into by the Western powers were extremely damaging to the empire's finances as well as to its sovereignty.

But it was last used during the Caliphate. It seems like it might have some use for the Ottomans in a later era. Could it be expanded beyond what it was without the OTL Suez Canal just becoming the more efficient path?

It could paint a target on the Turks, but as long as they're aware of that, it might be difficult to actually take advantage of it. Defeats on the frontiers in Europe were one thing, defeating the Turks so deep within their empire pre-Arab nationalism is an entirely different matter. If this alt-Suez is built pre-19th century, then the empire is still VERY capable of defending itself against outside threats.
 
Crazy alternative: Some combination of outside forces build it. Maybe the Venetians after a successful Crusade against Egypt? Then, when the Ottomans invade the region, they have this nice bew canal.
 
But it was last used during the Caliphate. It seems like it might have some use for the Ottomans in a later era. Could it be expanded beyond what it was without the OTL Suez Canal just becoming the more efficient path?

It could paint a target on the Turks, but as long as they're aware of that, it might be difficult to actually take advantage of it. Defeats on the frontiers in Europe were one thing, defeating the Turks so deep within their empire pre-Arab nationalism is an entirely different matter. If this alt-Suez is built pre-19th century, then the empire is still VERY capable of defending itself against outside threats.

It was but the Caliphate was its own thing. I mean, the Caliphate ruled practically the entire Muslim world at its apex and even though the Mughal Empire would later become the overall largest Muslim empire in terms of population, the Abbasid canals and irrigation systems suffered quite seriously over the years, particularly at the hands of the Mongols where they were destroyed so thoroughly that even modern-day Iraq hasn't covered the same amount of land with canals as the Abbasids did.

Plus, I didn't mention this before but the construction of something analogous to the Canals of the Pharaohs, especially when expanded to accommodate for larger, heavier ships has the possibility of disrupting the flow of the Nile. Egyptian history is written by the Nile, and failures of the annual Nile floods to provide water, sediment, and nutrients to grow crops are historically disastrous events in Egyptian history.

So yeah, in my humble assessment, if a country wants to build the Suez Canal, it really has to build the Suez Canal.
 
Top