These passages are sufficient to show the immense size of ancient ships, and to prove that their system of naval architecture could not have been directed to contend against contrary winds, but was calculated to transport the largest burdens.
[1] A modern first-rate is about 205 feet long, 54 feet broad, and draws 25 feet water. Its weight is about 4600 tons, when the guns and provisions are on board. Of course, the weight even of Ptolemy's immense ship could not have approached this. Athen. Deipnosophistae, lib. v. § 37, (p. 203.) Our skill in transporting large blocks of marble is so small, that we have been compelled to cut in two some of the Lycian monuments of no great size.
We must now notice the passages which have been supposed to controvert the account we have given of the completion of the canal between the Nile and the Red Sea. The first is a passage of Pliny the Elder, which asserts that Ptolemy Philadelphus only carried the canal to the bitter lakes. "Ex quo navigabilem alveum perducere in Nilum, qua parte ad Delta dictum decurrit, sexagies et bis centena mill. passuum intervallo, (quod inter flumen et Rubrum mare interest,) primus omnium Sesostris Aegypti rex cogitavit: mox Darius Persarum: deinde Ptolemaeus sequens: qui et duxit fossam latitudine pedum centum, altitudine XL, in longitudinem XXXVII mill. D passuum usque ad Fontes amaros." It is needless to remind the reader that Diodorus and Strabo, who lived before Pliny, and had both resided long in Egypt, had seen the canal finished, and described the lock by which it communicated with the Red Sea. It appears, indeed, that the passage, as it stands, has arisen from some inadvertence of Pliny, or perhaps from some blunder of his copyists; for he contradicts his statement, that the canal of Ptolemy terminated at the bitter lakes, in a subsequent passage, in which he mentions that Philadelphus constructed the branch which reached Arsinöe, and was called the river of Ptolemy.—"Eae viae omnes Arsinöen ducunt, conditam sororis nomine in sinu Charandra, a Ptolemaeo Philadelpho, qui primus Troglodyticen excussit, et amnem qui Arsinöen praefluit, Ptolemaeum appellavit."[1]
[1] Plinii Natur. Hist. lib. vi. § 33.
The other passage is contained in Plutarch's life of Antony; and to a casual reader, who forgets that the canal could only have been navigable during the season of the inundation, in consequence of the high level of the waters of the Red Sea, a difficulty in explaining the passage will immediately occur, and an inference will be drawn against the existence of the canal at the time. Monsieur Letronne, with his usual critical sagacity, has, however, pointed out the combination of facts which render the anecdote in Plutarch a confirmation of the ordinary employment of the canal, rather than an argument against its existence at the time.[1] Cleopatra, when alarmed at the result of the war between Antony and Augustus, had sent her son Caesario, the reputed child of Julius Cesar, with a considerable amount of treasure, through Ethiopia into India.[2] "When Antony returned to Alexandria after the battle of Actium, he found Cleopatra engaged in a very stupendous and bold enterprise. She was endeavouring to transport her fleet over the isthmus between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, which, in the narrowest part, is three hundred stades, and by this means, with her fleet in the Arabian gulf, and with her treasures, to escape from slavery and war."[3] Letronne has pointed out, that the battle of Actium having been fought on the 2nd of September, B.C. 31, it is evident from the subsequent events, that Antony could not have rejoined Cleopatra in Egypt before the month of February, or perhaps even later, in the ensuing year. Now, this period coincides with that at which the low state of the waters of the Nile must have rendered the canal useless for the passage of Cleopatra's fleet. Her extreme terror would not allow her to wait until the rise of the Nile again rendered the canal navigable, and she resolved on transporting her fleet to the Red Sea by land. It must be observed, however, that the project could hardly have occurred to Cleopatra as feasible, unless she had been well aware that vessels often passed from the Mediterranean into the Red Sea. The project was abandoned, as the Arabs of Petra burned the first ships that Cleopatra attempted to transport; and Antony soon persuaded her that his affairs were by no means so desperate as she supposed.
[1] Mémoire sur l'Isthme de Suez, dans la Revue des deux Mondes, tom. xxvii. 223.
[2] Plutarch in Anton., § 81.—Langhorn's Translation, in 1 vol., p. 656.
[3] Plutarch in Anton., § 69.—Translation, p. 652.
The canal was of far too great importance to the prosperity of Egypt, and the revenues of the country were too immediately connected with its existence, as one of the highways for exporting the produce of the Delta, for the Romans to neglect its conservation. It is true that the Romans never paid much attention to commerce, which they despised; and during the long period they governed their immense empire in comparative tranquillity, they did less to improve and extend its relations than any other people of antiquity. But they were always peculiarly attentive to preserve every undertaking which was connected with the agricultural industry and land revenue of their provinces. Unless, therefore, their attention had been directed to the canal of Suez, either as an important military line of communication, or as an instrument for displaying the pride and power of the empire, it would have undergone no improvement under the Roman emperors.
It happened, however, that when Trajan became anxious to display his magnificence in adorning Rome with new buildings, that the fashion of the times rendered the granite and the porphyry in the neighbourhood of the Red Sea indispensable. To obtain the immense columns, and the enormous porphyry vases, which were then admired, with sufficient celerity and in sufficient quantity, it became necessary to render the canal navigable for a longer period of time every year. In order to effect this, Trajan constructed a new canal from the vicinity of Babylon, and connected it with the ancient canal through the valley of Seba Biar.[1] This new work is called the river of Trajan by Ptolemy the geographer; and as it gave an additional elevation of thirteen feet to the stream which fed the canal, it may have supplied the means of keeping the navigation open for about six months yearly.[2]