Although the Egyptian expedition of 1882 bears no comparison either as to its duration, difficulties, or hard fighting with that of the Crimea, still in respect to the number of troops embarked at the outset the two closely approximate. The force sent to Egypt from England, and from the Mediterranean garrisons, amounted to about 26,000 men, with 54 field guns and 5,000 cavalry and artillery horses. To these were shortly added about 8,000 men from India, consisting of the Seaforth Highlanders, a battery of artillery, and several regiments of native cavalry and infantry. The troops from home commenced embarking towards the end of July; and so complete and satisfactory were the arrangements of the Admiralty, due in great measure to the energy and experience of Admiral Sir William Mends, the Director of Transports, that after a voyage of 3,000 miles they arrived at Alexandria without a _contretemps_ of any kind. The general outline of the campaign and of the movements to be undertaken had been discussed before the departure of the expedition, and it was virtually decided to take temporary possession of the Suez Canal; Ismailia becoming the base of operations with a view to an advance upon Cairo. There were obvious political and strategical reasons for the decision. In the first place the occupation of the canal would secure its safety, and prevent its being blocked or injured by the enemy--a most important European interest in itself; and it is curious that the late Monsieur de Lesseps, who was in communication with Arabi and who was at Ismailia at the time of our arrival, was violently opposed to our action in this respect. In the next place Cairo was then the centre of disaffection, and as it was known that the Egyptian army, reinforced by Bedouins, was in considerable strength and entrenching at Tel-el-Kebir, on the verge of the desert, it was probable that a rapid advance from Ismailia and a severe defeat of the enemy would cause a general collapse, and thus save Cairo from fire and pillage. These various considerations determined the general plan of the operations, and the result amply justified the anticipations formed. To have advanced from Alexandria, or from the neighbouring Bay of Aboukir, would have entailed a long and difficult march south, through the Delta of the Nile, a country without roads and intersected by irrigating canals. Further, the distance to Cairo was about 120 miles, as compared with 75 from Ismailia. In short, no striking or rapid result could be anticipated by an advance from Alexandria, and in the meantime Cairo would have been left at the mercy of a mutinous army, and of other elements of disaffection and disorder.