
The recent film by Ridley Scott on the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt; has raised discussions about the historicity of this event. Although the film tried to offer a natural interpretation to explain the miraculous events in history, it failed to give a convincing historical account of the Exodus. Presenting Moses as an army general and adoptive brother of Ramses II, placing the Exodus at a wrong time and in the wrong position. In order to understand the historical context of the Isreaelite Exodus, we must first be able to identify the geographical location of this event.At the center of the Bible is the story of a Semitic tribe in Egypt at the time of Joseph, leaving him to return to Canaan some time later, under the guidance of Moses. The Bible scholars and Egyptologists had, until the middle of the 20th century, considered the narration of Exodus as a representation of a true historical account. After the Second World War, however, the situation has completely changed. Thanks to archaeological excavations, more light has been cast on the ancient history of Egypt and Canaan and the hopes of finding confirmation of the biblical story have evaporated. After excavating all Egyptian locations in the eastern part of the Nile delta, no evidence was found to support the Bible Exodus story.
The lack of archaeological evidence, however, was due to the fact that scholars were looking for; both for the evidence to confirm the miraculous tales of the Bible, such as the separation of the sea, which can not be historically founded, or in the wrong and wrong historical period the geographical position. However, when we look for evidence of an exodus of Bedouin Semitic groups, on the Egyptian Sinai and in Canaan, the situation changes radically, and we immediately found evidence for the only attempt that took place at the beginning of the 19th dynasty. As Exodus 1:11 states that the Israelites were forced to build Ramesses as a depository city for the Pharaoh, scholars have assumed that this was the same city built by Ramses II, known from Egyptian texts such as Pi-Ramses, the House of Ramses , and considering this king is the pharaoh of oppression.The Pharaoh of Exodus, however, was not Ramses II, but his grandfather Ramses I, who founded the 19th dynasty. It was this Ramses who, during the residence of the Israelites in Egypt, had his residence in the fortified city of Zarw in the north of Sinai, the capital of the biblical land of Goshen in the Arab name, where they lived. It is also known that the children of Israel remained in this position until they were forced to build the city of Ramses, before leaving Egypt under Moses.
Pa-Ramses, who became Ramses I and established the 19th dynasty, was a local resident of the border town of Zarw, and was also appointed governor of this border town fortified by Horemheb, the last pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty. When he ascended the throne, Ramses I was already an old man and died at the end of his second year. The moment of his death in 1333 B.C., coincided with a rebellion of some Semitic groups in Sinai, who were attempting to cross the Egyptian borders in Canaan. On the east side of the north wall of the great hypostyle hall in the temple of Amun at Karnak, we find evidence of these Semitic Bedouins, called Shasu by the Egyptians, who attempt to cross Egyptian borders at Canaan. The texts affirm that Seti I, succeeded Ramses I, received a report that said: “The Shasu-Bedouins are plotting a rebellion and their leaders have gathered in the hills of Kharu (Palestine).”

Recently, Egyptian archaeologists have discovered the city of Zarw in the north of Sinai, in the same location as Goshen, including grocery stores built for the army. Thus we have evidence of the Israelite exodus from Egypt, confirmed by Egyptian archeology, that Horemheb was the pharaoh of oppression and Ramses I the Pharaoh of Exodus.Ahmed Osman