What happens to Egypt w/o Napoleon's invasion?

As the title says - what would have happened had Napoleon never invaded Egypt? IOTL, he played a vital role in breaking the power of the Mameluke ruling caste (although the Mamelukes had already been in a state of civil war for nearly 30 years), which enabled Muhammad Ali to seize power and ruthlessly modernize the region. What would have happened to Egypt had Napoleon never invaded it? Would the Mamelukes retain power? With the Mameluke civil war still in force, would the centralizing projects of the Porte succeed & Egypt be put under the Empire's authority?
 
With the Mameluke civil war still in force, would the centralizing projects of the Porte succeed & Egypt be put under the Empire's authority?
Most likely, especially since, without Nappy's invasion, the siege of Vidin (capital of the notorious rebel/bandit Osman Pazvantoglu, a powerful ally of the conservatives and Janissaries) will continue instead of ending abruptly. Assuming Vidin falls and Pazvantoglu is dealt with (he'll probably be executed in Constantinople), Selim III's prestige and political position will be strengthened by a respectable degree, making it easier for him to reform the empire.​
 
Last edited:
The slow and gradual decline of Ottoman authority in Egypt may continue, rather than the abrupt drop caused by the seizure by Muhammad Ali. But what about a more optimistic scenario? Maybe without Napoleon's invasion, the Ottomans can concentrate resources into ending the Mamluk Civil War. Egypt might even be reintegrated more fully into the Empire. This might not happen, of course, but it's worth a mention.
 
...Selim III's prestige and political position will be strengthened by a respectable degree, making it easier for him to reform the empire.​
On the other hand, would Selim move as fast as he did w/o the French invasion though? IOTL the success of the Nizam-i-Cedid Army against French troops considerably pleased Selim and convinced him to move faster, expanding the ranks of the New Order troops and their reach. Would he do such a thing if the Army had not proven themselves in battle?
 
IOTL the success of the Nizam-i-Cedid Army against French troops considerably pleased Selim and convinced him to move faster
Arguably moving slower might help in lessening the fear and discontent from Ayans at any one time, helping the empire deal with rebellions one at a time.
 
On the other hand, would Selim move as fast as he did w/o the French invasion though? IOTL the success of the Nizam-i-Cedid Army against French troops considerably pleased Selim and convinced him to move faster, expanding the ranks of the New Order troops and their reach. Would he do such a thing if the Army had not proven themselves in battle?
Arguably moving slower might help in lessening the fear and discontent from Ayans at any one time, helping the empire deal with rebellions one at a time.
What @Madhukar_Shah said, plus Pazvantoglu's defeat will almost certainly butterfly away the murder of Hadji Mustafa Pasha by the Janissaries, something that will butterfly away the Serbian Revolution and might have some interesting effects, since according to Wikipedia (I know, I know) he allowed local Serbian nobles to collect taxes and establish their own troops. If this experience is repeated in Bulgaria and Greece (after their ayans, like Ali Pasha of Yanina, are dealt with) together with a Tanzimat (or Nizam-i Cedid in this case) that happens decades earlier and other butterflies (the Treaty of Balta Liman not being written since Muhammad Ali's rise is averted, for example), the 19th century will be much better for the Ottomans.

@Osman Aga
 
@Osman Aga
he is kind of giving his exams, so I don’t think he will be able to reply.

but this has been already discussed somewhat under a different thread https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/france-doesnt-invade-egypt-in-1798.497982/

Anyway, what Osman Aga had said back then:
France not losing around 20-30k soldiers is a big +... I also asume Malta is not conquered either so the Knights of St. John remain in Malta.

Can't say whether France will win the Second Coalition. They probably will with Napoleon and 20,000 extra soldiers. I can only assume.

The Nizam-I Cedid reforms continue albeit without showing how they are. Their first performance could be against the Janissaries who may revolt in Istanbul.

I agree with Osman Pazvantoglu removed far sooner from Vidin. This may also be one of the first campaigns the New Army shows its worth. Eastern Balkans are likely to remain within the control of Ottoman Central Authorities, about 30 years earlier. A big plus for the Ottomans in terms of finances and manpower source.

The biggest advantage is Mehmed Ali. That is if we assume things go like OTL. Mehmed Ali removed the Mamluks and Janissaries while enforcing the reforms Istanbul wanted, in Egypt. This gave him the advantage over the Ottoman Authorities. But if the reforms are going on, the Ottoman Authorities are at least two decades ahead of Egypt, without halting it in 1807. So Mehmed Ali coming in power is not the biggest issue for the Ottoman Empire.
Assuming he doesn't, the Ottomans have easier time to restore order in the provinces and far more earlier, even Egypt by removing the Mamluks. The biggest threat would be Ali Pasha Tepelene.

No Napoleonic invasion of Egypt also means likely no Russo-Turkish participation in the Ionian Islands. Which means the islands becomes a target for the Royal Navy. Selim III was an admirer of France and even had sympathy for the revolutionaries. He was forced into the war due to the invasion of Egypt. Though, then again, the Ottomans could join regardless considering how close to comfort the French are next to the Ottoman Empire. If a Russo-Turkish War breaks out the Ottomans have the advantage of no Russian Navy in the Mediterranean, if there is no Russo-Turkish Campaign in the Ionian Islands. Which means no blockade of the Straits like OTL.
 
Top