Previously to the commencement of this great work, at least two erroneous impressions had prevailed: of these the first, that the Mediterranean was from 25 to 30 feet below the level of the Red Sea at Suez,[325] has been exploded by the completion of the canal; but, as the second (reflecting on the originality of M. de Lesseps’ undertaking), though a much less important one, seems still to exist, I may state that the course of his canal is quite different from that of the fresh-water one said to have been navigable in the reign of the Pharaohs (its course is still traceable here and there), which ran from a point on the Nile a little below Cairo in a north-easterly direction, towards Lake Timseh, and, thence, almost due south by the west side of the Bitter Lakes to Suez. This canal had no connection, or rather water communication, with the Mediterranean except by the easternmost branches of the Nile below Cairo, and, though the Nile at that city is ten feet above the Red Sea at Suez, it may be doubted whether this ancient canal was ever used except during the rainy season, though Herodotus states there was width on it for two triremes to row abreast. Certainly, no mention, direct or indirect, records the passage of any craft worthy of the name of a ship between the Mediterranean and Red Sea.[326] The great ship-canal (see map, p. 364), now in use, does not go near Cairo or the Nile, but cuts through the narrowest part of the isthmus at a point about 100 miles east of Alexandria. [Sidenote: Popular errors on this subject.] [Sidenote: M. de Lesseps.] A popular error also prevails that this vast undertaking was only contemplated a few years ago. Nor do these popular errors here end, for everybody supposes that M. Ferdinand de Lesseps, to whose genius and energy the world is indebted for this great work, was an _engineer_, whereas he was really a _diplomatist_,[327] and was obliged to make himself master of the art of engineering to be in some measure able to cope with the host of engineers, professional and theoretical, who opposed his marvellous scheme. The idea of a canal across the Isthmus of Suez by the route adopted by M. de Lesseps is a very old one. So far back as A.D. 638-40, Amrou, soon after the conquest of Egypt,[328] wrote to his master the Khalif Omar recommending the establishment of a communication between the two seas, the intervening country being, as he describes it, “an undulating green meadow with ploughed fields—such is the delta of the Nile; a dusty desert, a liquid and clayey plain, a black slush—such is the isthmus to cut through.” But the Khalif objected to the piercing of the isthmus, “fearing it would open out the country to the influence of foreigners,” a fear that prevailed also with one or two leading statesmen of our own country and in our own time.