This is contrary to the normal archaeological practice of testing a theory against the evidence, rather than the evidence against the theory.The alleged refusal by the Egyptians to record the events of the Exodus isn't the only problem, as pointed out by eminent biblical scholar We should observe that the biblical sources for the earlier periods are remarkably unspecific.So if there were archaeological remains to be found from the Exodus, one would have expected them to be found by now.And yet, thus far there is no trace of the biblical "600,000 men on foot, besides children" plus "a mixed crowd..live stock in great numbers" (Exod. The biblical accounts concerning the Exodus contradict one another, and as a result a variety of dates have been proposed for the Exodus.That's easily 2 million people (assuming one man, one woman, 1.5 children, which is very conservative). Or the plagues, which would be similarly unlikely not to have been recorded. Given the standard of Egyptian record keeping of the time, this is an absence that would require explanation.Bible literalists claim that it did happen, but that the Egyptians destroyed all the records, for reasons generally unspecified, though embarrassment has been offered.This article examines the Young Earth creationist and Biblical literalist claims regarding the historical reality of the Exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt, as well as the evidence relating to such claims.Mainstream history and archaeology now consider the Exodus never to have happened, and the story to be an entirely fictional narrative put together between the 8th and 5th centuries BCE.
Rohl and Velikovsky both date the Exodus to Dudimose, final ruler of the 13th Dynasty at the very end of the Middle Kingdom, at the time of the Hyksos rise to power in the Delta region.As the tribe expanded, they may have begun to clash with neighbors, perhaps sparking the tales of conflict in Joshua and Judges. also summarizes the scholarly consensus in his book Biblical Archaeology: A Very Short Introduction (published by Oxford University Press and winner of the 2011 Biblical Archaeology Society's "Best Popular Book on Archaeology"); Despite attempts by a number of biblical archaeologists — and an even larger number of amateur enthusiasts — over the years, credible direct archaeological evidence for the Exodus has yet to be found.William Dever, an archaeologist normally associated with the more conservative end of Syro-Palestinian archaeology, has labeled the question of the historicity of Exodus “dead.” Israeli archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog provides the current consensus view on the historicity of the Exodus; The Israelites never were in Egypt. While it can be argued that such evidence would be difficult to find, since nomads generally do not leave behind permanent installations, archaeologists have discovered and excavated nomadic emplacements from other periods in the Sinai desert.By the 1970s, archaeologists had largely given up regarding the Bible as any use at all as a field guide.The archaeological evidence of local Canaanite, rather than Egyptian, origins of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel is "overwhelming," and leaves "no room for an Exodus from Egypt or a 40‐year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness." The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult objects are of the Canaanite god El, the pottery is in the local Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet is early Canaanite.