Parting the Desert: The Creation of the Suez Canal

In what was a very unfortunate decision, Zachary Karabell's "Parting the Desert: The Creation of the Suez Canal" was assigned the Dewey Decimal Code of 386.43029 which implies that it is about "Transportation" and specifically "Inland waterway and Ferry Transportation" which it is not. Thus many GR readers have had the wrong expectations raised and had have been very unhappy. For those expecting something similar to David McCullogh's masterful "Path Between the Seas", the disappointment has been particularly cruel. Karabell's book is a well written hommage to Ferdinand Lesseps who in his epilogue Karabell specifically compares to Percy Bysshe Shelley's Ozymandias:<br />And on the pedestal, these words appear<br />'My name is Ozymandias:, King of Kings:<br />Look on my works, ye Mighty and Despair!'<br />Nothing beside remains. Beside the decay<br />of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare<br />The lone and level sands stretch far away.<br /><br />Karabell tells a delightful tale of how the Suez Canal was the collaboration of a promoter Ferdinand de Lesseps who hoped the project would enhance France's global standing and Egypt's Khedive, Muhammad Said Pasha, who hoped that it would make his country stronger. Against tremendous obstacles the two indeed built the canal but by the time the dust settled, Egypt was a de facto British Colony and the canal was British property. The prime impact of the Suez Canal would be to reduce the travel time to India and to allow the British to derive much more wealth from its Empire.<br /><br />Karabell makes no real attempt to describe the construction of the canal. However, his description of de Lesseps and his extraordinary effort is compelling. Karabell also shows a remarkable understanding of French cultural and social values during the nineteenth century. His treatment of the politics of the Second Empire is sublime and his analysis of the Saint-Simonian movement is masterful. His book will be a source of great pleasure to anyone interested in this period of French history.

Recommended for - Readers looking for the political history of the Suez Canal.<br />Not Recommended for - Technical detail seekers.<br /><br />The creation of the Suez Canal was a monumental achievement. Ferdinand de Lesseps went through great efforts to complete his "borrowed" ambition.The book describes the political atmosphere during the creation of the canal.The creation of the suez canal company and its operations are followed through the creation of the canal.<br />Those looking for elaborate technical descriptions might be disappointed though. You are in for a history treat otherwise.

an excellent, and rather sad, reading. Not only covering the story of how the Suez Canal came to being, but also describing the contemporary politics and interactions covering players based in Egypt, France, Ottoman Empire and England. The last two chapters are sad as they briefly summarized the unfulfilled dreams that were set for the Canal and it's impact on Egypt's, and global economy and geopolitics. <br />It is a must read book

Karabell is at his best when he's giving broad strokes history. I know very little about nineteenth century France, so I can't judge his accuracy, but the background he gives on Saint-Simonianism and the general intellectual climate of the era is fascinating. I enjoyed, too, the political history of the constant fencing between France and England, and the sections that looked at the rise of an economic middle class with money to spend on small-scale investing were interesting.<br /><br />But what he's not very good at is <i>people</i>, which is a problem when you're writing a book in the Great Man school of history. I have no clearer picture of what meeting Ferdinand de Lesseps would be like now than I did when I started the book. Part of this is probably a dearth of sources (Karabell makes clear that Lesseps was not prone to introspection in print), but it's frustrating to me how rarely Karabell lets any of his individuals speak for themselves. He's clearly done a great deal of primary source research, but time after time he paraphrases letters when quoting them at length might have given a better sense of their authors' personalities. <br /><br />I am also intensely frustrated by the chapter on the fellahin, which notes disapprovingly that other sources have often treated the fellahin as an undifferentiated mass with no ambitions or opinions of their own, and then . . . proceeds to do the exact same thing. Zero points for lampshading, there. I get that the fellahin were largely illiterate and left few written records behind, but surely someone must have done <i>some</i> ethnographic research into Egypt in the 20th century that included oral traditions about the canal? Any touch of anyone's personal voice would have done this chapter a world of good.<br /><br />In conclusion, interesting, but there's probably better books on this subject out there.

"Parting the Desert" is a quick read that will fill-in the interested on the Suez Canal. However it reads more like an ode to Ferdinand de Lesseps and could have been his biography.<br /><br />Frankly, I believe the story would have been better told if there had been a larger discussion of the technology and management developed rather than the battle of egos that delayed the project. A better story of accomplishment is "A Thread Across the Ocean by John Steele Gordon about the first transatlantic cable. Incidentally, both projects were occurring at the same time.<br /><br />This book remains a good filler for those interested in the politics of the French 2nd Empire, but, does not add much to those looking for the history of technology and innovation.

Definitely one of the best history books I've ever read. The story is written so compellingly as to be almost novel-like.

Ferdinand de Lesseps (1805-1894) was born in Versailles, France, to a diplomatic family. He enjoyed his own diplomatic career from 1825 to 1854, serving posts in Alexandria, Cairo, Barcelona, Madrid, Tunis, Rotterdam and Rome. He was influenced by the Saint-Simonians of the early 19th Century. In 1854, after retiring from diplomatic service, Lesseps received a concession from Said Pasha of Egypt to build the Suez Canal. When stationed in Egypt 20 years earlier, Lesseps had read Napoleon’s memo on construction of the canal and also developed a close relationship with Said Pasha. Now retired and having lost both his wife and his son the year before, Lesseps threw himself into the task with enthusiasm.<br /><br />Lesseps succeeded in raising 200 million francs from the French public and another 80 million francs from the Egyptian government. The Compagnie universelle du canal maritime de Suez was formed in 1858. Lesseps broke ground on the project in 1859 and the Canal was opened in 1869, six months after the transcontinental railroad in the US and at a cost more than double its original estimate. The US Civil War provided some financial relief since its choke of cotton supply helped buoy the price of Egyptian cotton and therefore Egyptian government revenues at the time.<br /><br />Construction of the Canal faced many obstacles in addition to the monumental engineering challenges. It was opposed by the United Kingdom which feared it threatened its commercial dominance in international trade. The UK drew attention to the use of the corvee, or forced labor, in constructing the Canal. It is estimated that 30,000 people were working on the Canal at any one time and that 1.5 million people from various countries contributed to its construction. Once the Canal was built, the UK changed its stance and in 1875 acquired the Egyptian shares in the Canal Company. With this acquisition came increased British influence over the Suez Canal.<br /><br />From 1899 to 1956, a statue of Lesseps stood at the entrance of the Suez Canal. It was removed from its pedestal during the nationalization of the Canal by President Nasser.<br /><br />In 1879, at the age of 74, Lesseps was appointed President of the Panama Canal Company. He then set out on a fundraising trip to New York and Washington. Construction on the Panama Canal began in 1882. It was intended to be built at sea level without locks, like the Suez Canal. Progress was beset by technical construction difficulties as well as malaria and yellow fever outbreaks. The Panama Canal Company went bankrupt in 1888. In 1893, Lesseps, his son and several other Company officials were found guilty of bribing French deputies to vote for financial support for the Canal. The sentence was overturned by a higher court. In 1904, the US acquired the Company’s assets and began work on the Canal under revised designs including locks.<br /><br />In 1886, as head of the Franco-American Union, Lesseps spoke at the dedication ceremony of the Statue of Liberty, a gift from France to the US.<br /><br />For further reading: Parting the Desert: The Creation of the Suez Canal by Zachary Karabell.

Somehow I had never truly considered the history of the Suez canal. It was just a geographical fixture, a reality that I never really questioned. I guess I assumed that it had been built by Europeans to expedite shipping from the Far East, but until I read this book, I really didn't know who built it, or when. Perhaps the fact that the project overlapped with America's Civil War contributed to this blind spot in my appreciation of history more globally.<br /><br />This book opens with a description of Napoleon Bonaparte's invasion of Egypt following the French Revolution. It was during this period that the French people became fascinated with Egypt and its history, and the first thoughts of a canal across the isthmus of Suez began to emerge. Ultimately, building the canal became the obsession of Ferdinand de Lesseps, a former French diplomat, who somehow managed to see the project through to completion.<br /><br />The project was not only an impressive engineering challenge, but also diplomatically and politically complex. England actively opposed the building of the canal, which is ironic because they ultimately would gain control of the canal. The rulers of Egypt viewed the canal as a source of revenue that would allow them to modernize their nation, with the goal of becoming the economic and political equal of the nations of Europe. But Egypt was still nominally part of the Ottoman Empire, which created another entire layer of complexity.<br /><br />Ultimately, the finished canal did prove to be profitable, but not for the Egyptians, who lost control of the canal to the Europeans after going so deeply into debt in pursuit of modernization that they risked default. In this way, the canal can be viewed as yet another symbol of the imperial attitudes and behaviors of the nations of Europe, exploiting poorer and less developed nations for their own benefit.<br /><br />I learned a lot about the global politics of the mid-nineteenth century as I read this book, especially the relationship between France and the United Kingdom during this period. The building of the Suez Canal was a reflection of the attitudes and goals of its period, and while the details of the canal itself are interesting, the context is important, even if it does make the book a bit slower to read.

I read this book as part of my research for a foreign policy discussion on "The Red Sea."This is a surprisingly engaging history of the building of the Suez Canal by Ferdinard de Lesseps, a Frenchman.Others had dreamt about a canal, as far back as antiquity but de Lesseps ultimately succeeded in completing this colossal effort of joining the Red Sea and the Mediterranean. It was not a straight forward project especially because Egypt was still part of the Ottoman Empire, and the Sultans were not particularly convinced the canal would serve their interests. The British consistently opposed it. However, the idea of the canal caught the imagination of the French after the fall of Napoleon. It is hard to underestimate the rivalry for building empires in the Middle East that consumed both the British and the French. The Egyptian khedive bankrupted Egypt to get it built as part of his program to modernize his country while he was also building a railroad between Cairo and Alexandria. How de Lesseps was able to overcome every obstacle with ingenuity, bravado, and his formidable diplomatic skills is indeed a remarkable story. All this took place during Victoria's reign and the "Third Empire" in France. The importance of the Suez Canal has faded as the Gulf States have gravitated to shipping oil through the "Persian Gulf." This history reveals the underlying structure of politics that still influence Middle Eastern issues today.

The rating here has nothing to do with the achievement of the Sues Canal or the men who made it happen. That was a sheer force of will and an engineering, political triumph. The telling of the Canal, though, included too much backstory and not enough on the actual building, for my taste. However, if you are looking for a story of leadership where compromise, patience, and grit come together, Ferdinand Lessep is your man. <br /><br />My hope was to read about the building process of this canal, with the impact on Egypt at the forefront. This book covered the way-back story of every detail. For instance, Napoleon III was emperor in France while the canal was built, so his backstory began with the birth of Napoleon I. Really the relevant detail was the fact that France fell in love with Egypt because of Napoleon’s campaign. Also, some of the main components of the story got repetitive—all right, the venture almost failed and Lessep kept it going just because he wanted to; all right, they ran out of money and did the same things to get more, etc.<br /><br />The ultimate Egyptian dependence on Europe was both heartbreaking and courageous, as they sought to actively take their place among world powers again, just lacking the capital to do so. They sought to gain from partnerships but wound up being financially governed by the West. Perhaps that is the way in which East and West were truly united in this project, rather than through waters.