I feel like I have the energy to make the case myself now. I have re-read the narrative with an analytical eye just for you.
Grant perceives that the fact that Nelson was able to find the French fleet was really lucky because they had managed to evade him for so long. For example, Nelson actually got to Alexandria first, after Napoleon had departed Malta. Nelson left on the 28th June, only for Napoleon to arrive on the 29th. (The French Fleet was slower than the British.)
Nelson gives Napoleon's military expedition to Egypt a reality feasibility check. Grant quotes Nelson’s letter to St Vincent directly:
- “Upon their whole proceedings together with such information as I have been able to collect, it appeared clear to me, that either they were destined to assist the rebel Pasha and to overthrow the present government of Turkey, or to settle a colony in Egypt, and to open a trade to India by way of the Red Sea; for strange, as it may appear at first sight, an enterprising Enemy, if they have the force or consent of the Pasha of Egypt, may with great ease get an army to the Red Sea. And if they have concerted a plan with Tippoo Sahib to have vessels at Suez, three weeks, at this season, is a common passage to the Malabar Coast, when our India possession would be in great danger.”
Notice how Nelson himself reflects on such a plan to make a French colony in Egypt, “for strange, as it may appear at first sight”. Finally Nelson has fantastic forethought that if the French can get an army on the Red Sea, they can send French troops via Tippoo Sahib to India. What’s intriguing is according to a 13 February 1798 report by Talleyrand:
- "Having occupied and fortified Egypt, we shall send a force of 15,000 men from Suez to India, to join the forces of Tipu-Sahib and drive away the English."
I think what is murky, is that if the French got away and reached Toulon I don’t think the same configured fleet would go back to Egypt. Why would you send the same fleet back after successfully expediting a military force to Egypt? My logic is that you give the fleet more ships of the line and transports because of this success, and this enables Napoleon’s Egyptian campaign to be successful. However, not everyone has that common sense. Anyhow, I think it would be imperative for Napoleon and his army to live off the Egyptian land regardless.
A number of foreign units we raised by Napoleon, which total up to 15,000 men.
- Indigenous Guides – ‘Omar’s Company’
- Legion Greque – (Brigade: includes infantry, artillery, Cavalry and the ‘Legion Cophte’)
- Legion Maltese (raised in Malta)
- Company of Syrian Janissaries a Cheval
- The French army: 60,000 men
The French fleet can survive in either one or two ways. The first is Napoleon releases the fleet on the 31st July and Nelson misses it by one day again by arriving on the 1st August.
The second is how François-Paul Brueys d'Aigalliers anchored his fleet at Aboukir Bay and I quote:
- "The French fleet lying off Akoukir was singularly ill-prepared to meet an enemy. The French position had all the potential to be a strong one - the fleet was in line, with its back to the coast, which should have rendered it impossible to turn, while to the north the forts of Aboukir itself and the island of Bequireres secured one end of the line. However, the fleet was anchored too far offshore, and the normal naval practice of closing the ships up and stringing cables between them (to prevent their line being penetrated) had not been followed."
If François-Paul Brueys d'Aigalliers had anchored properly then Nelson would have reacted differently and may not have tried to destroy the fleet because they were in a greater position. Notice the movement of Nelson's ships and how he got his ships behind the French line, mainly at the front, in the image below.
View attachment 455136
The capture of Sidney Smith is based on that “In October 1798 he was appointed to the command of the "Tigre," 80, and was sent to the Mediterranean.” The French fleet leaves Aboukir bay on the 31st July. Either the French fleet catches Smith on return to France in the mid-Mediterranean, which is a difference of one to two months. Although Grant says Smith is captured by reinforcements going back to Egypt. However, if a French fleet does return to Egypt with reinforcements this would give Napoleon a chance of successfully besieging Acre even if Smith is not captured and is at Acre.
What is wholly ironic, is that Napoleon reminisced later in his life and said of Smith that:
"That man made me miss my destiny". That is one heck of statement coming from Napoleon, I think even he knew on reflection. I feel his frustration.
In sieging Acre is it pretty plain sailing for Napoleon. He enters Damascus with people throwing flowers at him, the streets strewn with palms and people offering him gifts. However, at this point, it is not completely finished the Turks. The Turks muster 7,000 to 20,000 men and land at Aboukir and are commanded by Mustafa Pasha. The army has no cavalry. (The battle of Aboukir) Napoleon, of course, wins the battle and creates "French Egypt".
In conclusion, Napoleon making "French Egypt" was very much closer than everybody realises.