An Observation Of Egyptian Nationalism And War Surrounding The Suez Canal

This investigation attempts to correctly analyze in what way the geography of Egypt influenced the ancient Egyptian religion. This query is very relevant because, certain geographical items influenced the creation of the ancient religion that helped shape many religions that are very prevalent today such as Christianity and Judaism. The issues that will be addressed are how the great Sahara Desert surrounding the civilization, the Nile river that nourishes the whole population, and how the overall common beliefs and myths built the foundation of the ancient Egyptian religion and subsequently influenced modern day religions. This analysis will focus on the time period of 3110 BCE to 550 CE and the place being examined is the country of Egypt. This will be accomplished through the exploration of research documents and informational novels.

The Suez Canal is the shortest waterway between the east and the west due to its unique location. It is the longest waterway without locks, this means that all the bodies of water are at the same level. Opened in 1869 after 10 years of work, it is liable to be widened and deepened to accommodate the big developed ship.

The western world’s fascination with Ancient Egypt began in the 19th century. The reason for this fascination first began with two separate literary works. The

Hiram Maxim created Machine Gun and in 1883, he created the first multi bullet-firing weapon. This lead to wider development of automatic weapons which were later used in war. (Note: the 1862 Gatling gun which was ran by hand cranking.)

Document 4 explains nationalization of of African territories. Following the conclusion of the Second World War, the Egyptians decided to pass laws in order to evacuate the British military from the Suez Canal area. As implied in Document 4, during the month of July 1956, President Gamal Abdel Nasser exemplified the nationalization of the area. Nasser perceived that if here were to bring nationalism to the Suez Canal, then he could assign a fee to the citizens that were not welcome. With this fee, he would influence the construction of a newly structured dam, hovering the Nile River of Egypt. Nasser understood that by nationalizing this canal, the world, and especially the British and French stockholders that were in ownership of the Canal Company would be taken aback. Even though President Nasser pledged that Canal Company would receive a significant amount of affluence for the loss of their property, the British, French, and Israeli societies decided that they would initiate a procedure to re-obtain their company, and overthrow Nasser. These countries formed a secret alliance, historically known as the tripartite collusion. The Israel society decided that they would engage in procedures opposing the Egyptian society in hopes of obtaining approval from many of the western nations. This was because they were limited on resources, not very well developed, and were very fearful of being authorized by an Arabian

Sayre, Henry. (2011). The Humanities: Culture, Continuity and Change. The Stability of Ancient Egypt. Upper

Amongst the turbid and dysfunction that is the Middle East lies the nation of Egypt. Egypt, a major country of the Middle East, is habitually considered stereotypical of Middle Eastern civilization, but further research guides one to the conclusion that Egypt is far from a generic Middle Eastern country. Egypt has a strong tradition of nationalism that has been formed during its history, giving it a national unity that is often non-existent in other Middle Eastern nations (1). This, as well as other advantages that Egypt has gained during its past, has allowed it to rise above the problems plaguing the rest of the Middle East and to form basically its

Egypt’s subjection to Hyksos rule had disrupted their feelings of safety, and thus enabled their awareness of security. This is first seen in Ahmose I’s introduction of buffer regions between Egypt and its Asian enemies. Furthermore, Egypt’s subjugation of foreign threats in efforts to assure prevention of future invasion reflects their new mentality. These actions exemplify Egypt’s adoption of an imperialist policy, accomplished by their adoption of Hyksos weaponry. Accordingly, M. Hayes exemplifies the impact of the Hyksos in stating that the new “warrior pharaoh’s would conquer to the limits of the world to ensure Egypt was as safe as it had once been.” Thus, the Hyksos occupation had impacted the Egyptian’s political power and in turn influenced their policy on foreign powers.

and this did take on a personal nature. It is written that he said he

The effects of Egypt’s control can be shown in, “In Nubia, Egypt imposed direct control and pressed the native population to adopt Egyptian language and culture…Egypt fully participated in the diplomatic and commercial networks linking the states of Western Asia. Egyptian soldiers, administrators, diplomats, and merchants traveled widely, bringing back new fruits and vegetables, new musical instruments, and new technologies…” (page 73, paragraphs 11-12). Egypt used their power to create a sort of “mini-Egypt”, this caused a rise an Egyptian practices and culture. In addition to spreading their own culture, Egypt also gathered from others. They used their connections, created through their territorial expansion, in order to learn and evolve their civilization. As a result of this, their actions and habits may have changed. It’s important to know how societies may influence and change one another, whether it be through force or trade.

Research Question: To what extent was the goal of U.S. actions surrounding the Suez Crisis of 1956 to preserve neutrality to protect U.S. interests?

I chose this book because of my newfound appreciation of Egyptian warfare. I had always been fascinated by Egyptian history, but had somewhat dismissed the study thereof. I highly suggest this book to anyone studying Egyptian warfare. It analyzes in great depth, the New Kingdom and its war strategies prior to the Egyptians’ takeover of Syria. The excruciating detail in which Egyptologist, Anthony Spalinger articulates has details for the novice, the middle student, and even an instructor of ancient civilizations.

Nasser intended to use the revenue from the waterway to fund the Aswan Dam project, but it would have taken Egypt 367 years to pay for the Dam from tolls alone. The Canal only brought in a profit of $52 million and not the $100 million profit that Nasser was claiming.

The Egyptians were experts at trading, importing and exporting goods with various countries. Due to its geographical location, Ancient Egypt was able to obtain great success through trading and commerce. The Nile River provided many inlets into the Red Sea and Mediterranean Sea, these passages allowed for greater opportunities for trading and communication with neighboring countries. The use of vessels proved to be a great resource in securing the Egyptian economy with its vast amount of riches, providing the main mode of transportation for trade and travel. This paper will examine Ancient Egypt’s relation with the Nile River and the trade and commerce that secured it as one of the greatest nations in history (Baines, 2002).

The Suez war began in 1956 when the President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal. Due to the canal’s great importance to the British and they colluded with Israel and France to regain control of the canal. The Suez Canal was especially important to the British because it connected the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean through the Red Sea. (Milner) This strategic location allowed them to trade and move across the world giving them control of their colonies. However, on July 26, 1956 President Nasser decided to nationalize the Suez Canal due to his anger at the British for withdrawing their loan offer to Egypt. (Milner) Consequently, the nationalization of the canal was a strategic move to lessen the British’s economic and political control of Egypt, which had lasted since 1882. Many Egyptians were unhappy with British’s occupation of their country so Nasser’s policies were popular in the Middle East. This was because the “expression of national