Why didnt Ancient Egypt dominate the Mediteranean?

As the preminent power their for a significan time, why not?

Egypt had goods coming in from across the Mediterranean, such as, Greek olives and wheat, Anatolian tin and copper, Palestinian jugs, and wood from Byblos. There is no reason to conquer a country you have good trade relations with.

    The Egyptians also had old weaponry in their arsenals. The mace was still widely used, instead of the axe for example up until the reign of Ramsses II.  The Hittites had these weapons and more. The Hittites had devastating war chariots, an obstacle to any Egyptian soldier in Syria and Palestine. It consisted of a wooden frame covered with leather, mounted on a wide axle with six-spoked wheels. Reliefs depict two or three riders on Hittite chariots, with the driver carrying a shield. At the Battle of Kadesh, the Hittites assembled 2,500 of these heavy chariots. The Hittites had a large advantage over the Egyptians who used bronze weapons. The Hittites were capable of using iron weapons as well as bronze.

Ancient Egypt constantly fought for Nubia and other lands in Africa. The Egyptians wanted to take control of Nubian raw materials such as gold. This led to many battles on the sands of what today is modern Sudan.

The Egyptians believed that Egypt was the center of the world and that their enemies came from the four points of the world (North, South, East, and West). Hittites to the North, the Nubians to the South, Asians to the Northeast, and to the West were the Libyans. The walls of Egypt were constantly bombarded by their enemies.

I will include more when I have the time.


Edited by Darius of Parsa - 18-Jun-2008 at 18:26

Originally posted by Darius of Parsa The Egyptians were also had old weaponry in their arsenals. The mace was still widely used, instead of the axe for example up until the reign of Ramsses II.  The Hittites had these weapons and more. The Hittites had devastating war chariots, an obstacle to any Egyptian soldier in Syria and Palestine. It consisted of a wooden frame covered with leather, mounted on a wide axle with six-spoked wheels. Reliefs depict two or three riders on Hittite chariots, with the driver carrying a shield. At the Battle of Kadesh, the Hittites assembled 2,500 of these heavy chariots. The Hittites had a large advantage over the Egyptians who used bronze weapons. The Hittites were capable of using iron weapons as well as bronze.

Several factors that come to mind:   geography; ancient egypt was based on the nile, mediterranean wasn't as important.  (they could simply march up the coast for the resources they needed, lebanon wood etc.)  Nubia was more valuable; gold, other minerals, more resources were spent on subduing that region.  Time period; naval technology was in its infancy, kind of difficult to conquer territory that requires a strong navy when for all intents and purposes ships can't sail out of sight of land.  If I remember correctly egypt didn't really even possess a naval force on the mediterranean until one of the last dynasties of the late period.  (30th dynasty I think) 

To me, the Egyptians seemed to be an isolated people save diplomacy and trade with other people. From the beginning, the Egyptian saw the surrounding deserts as a security net and they never needed to expand. Rome expanded because it always expanded because it was always bordered by other people that Rome deemed as potential threats. The Romans would conquer them and then so on and so forth. Another reason is that Egyptians probably never had the manpower to do so because they were always working on monuments glorifying the leaders while retarding their strength.

Edited by Sun Tzu - 30-Jun-2008 at 00:47

Reiterating what Justinian wrote:

 

When Egypt could have dominated whoever they wanted - i.e. the Old Kingdom, dynasty 3-6, and Middle Kindom, dyn. 11-12 - they pretty much ignored the Med. From an ancient Egyptian perspective that was the backlot to their property. No one serious to fight there, i.e. no real threat, and not much to gain compared to the south. Their ambitions and resources were almost exclusively focused southwards towards the interior along the Nile.  As was perfectly rational, as that was where the real profits could be made, ´gold mostly, and where the most potent military threats came from.

 

Egyptian attention later gradually shifted towards the Med during the New Kingdom and Late period, partly in response to this region becoming more threatening than previously during the New Kingdom, and during the Late period becoming economically more important to Egypt than the south.

 

Pharanoic burial treasure up until the New Kingdom was typically African gold from Nubia, viz. Tuthankhamen's tomb. Beginning in the Late period Pharanoic burial treasure instead was dominated by silver coming from the north across the Med, viz. the royal tombs at Tanis.

At one time the egyptians did rule as far as the third cataract and they contolled nubia and israel and their influence extended up into what is today turkey and the horn of africa and they occupied the sinai peninsula and libya at one time and they traded with the land of punt. The late egyptian navy was a force to reckoned with, and in the late period they had acsess to iron weaponry, an iron dagger was found in Tut's tomb if I remember corectly and they may have hired greek hopolites, Libyans, Sherdens, Hittites, Nubians and Philistines as mercenary's and in Rameses the great's time they may have had a sort of Knight the egyptians also had a wide variety of effective siege engines and siege tactics and according to a relief from the reign of thutmose they had a sort of "cataphract chariot" another reason why they were so dangerous was their chariots and missle troops. Here are some sights that may be helpful, wikipedia wasn't much help.

Edited by Count Belisarius - 11-Oct-2008 at 04:14

History of Egypt as a part of Africa act in the ancient Egyptian history. There is informative information about the Egyptian history in Gates of Egypt


Edited by adleer - 06-Oct-2008 at 05:45

Its true. Grain and barley were staple crops of Ancient Egypt, along with chickpeas and flax. It would be strange of them to import wheat from Greece.  

Papyrus and Pottery, if I recall correctly. Does Byblos still exist today?