Moses' Red Sea parting explained ?

I wish I knew enough to add something useful to the discussion, but thanks to all the knowledgeable people for making this an interesting read. I would like to add that the chariot was a lightweight platform for speed. All it had to do was provide support for a soldier and an arsenal of weapons greater than what a food soldier could easily carry. I do recall reading somewhere that the 6 spoke design is the lightest wheel that could be built at that time. More spokes more weight. Less spokes and the wheel was too weak. We have to consider that the war chariot was not an Egyptian invention, nor ... [More]

The Egyptian chariot was devised to carry an archer/driver, where we conclude it something to attack by surprise and disappear behind the lines again. Thanks for that infor QM, you have already answered some question I intended asking. But I am still curiousabout some things. It seems obvious to assume a chariot would would only be used on suitable terrain, such as reasonably flat, hard, ground, and the Egyptians would be aware of such limitations. A lighter wheel would have a greater impact on acceleration and manouverability than top speed. Look at the US cycling pursuit team at the 1984 oly... [More]

Thanks for that infor QM, you have already answered some question I intended asking. But I am still curiousabout some things. It seems obvious to assume a chariot would would only be used on suitable terrain, such as reasonably flat, hard, ground, and the Egyptians would be aware of such limitations. A lighter wheel would have a greater impact on acceleration and manouverability than top speed. Look at the US cycling pursuit team at the 1984 olympics, often slower at the start but finished faster, which was attributed the design of the wheels. But, I remember seeing a documentary on the "War H... [More]

... As it was only a TV documntary I referring to, can anyone confirm the performance of a chariot in the field, and point to some modern day field tests? Earlier I made some assumptions about suitable terrain for a chariot. I doubt these would include tidal areas. I would guess a chariot would be come useless in the sand above the high tide mark, let alone be able to make it into an are where drowning is a risk, but it's only a guess. ... There is a lot of debate over how ancient armies organized and used their chariot corps. The book questionmark referenced seems very solid for reliable info... [More]

This is why one ought not to be surprised if the occasional piece of chariot is found off the coast in the Red or Mediterranean sea. It's possible. Is it evidence of the biblical Exodus, however? No, of course not. I would be extremely suspicious if there was such a thing at plain sight, especially in the red sea, famous for its corals. The growth is about 20 mm a year, in 3000 years that would be 60 meters or about 181 feet until it reaches the surface. While that that not everywhere there are corals, In the Egypt/Sinai divide (both Gulf of Aqaba and Gulf of Suez) there is hardly a place with... [More]

In college I made a chariot for a college race. It was a small frame large enough for a single person sitting on a seat. It was built to take 2 quick release front bike tires. A long bamboo rod made it possible for a number of people to pull the chariot. I mention this because the chariot did not turn well. The wheels were set wide for stability, but the best you could do was a gentle turn even at the speed attained by people pulling the rig. If a chariot had te same problems, then turns would have to quite gradual or done at slow speeds.

In college I made a chariot for a college race. It was a small frame large enough for a single person sitting on a seat. It was built to take 2 quick release front bike tires. A long bamboo rod made it possible for a number of people to pull the chariot. I mention this because the chariot did not turn well. The wheels were set wide for stability, but the best you could do was a gentle turn even at the speed attained by people pulling the rig. If a chariot had te same problems, then turns would have to quite gradual or done at slow speeds. If we can believe Roman Chronicles, chariots were drift... [More]

I would be extremely suspicious if there was such a thing at plain sight, especially in the red sea, famous for its corals. The growth is about 20 mm a year, in 3000 years that would be 60 meters or about 181 feet until it reaches the surface. While that that not everywhere there are corals, In the Egypt/Sinai divide (both Gulf of Aqaba and Gulf of Suez) there is hardly a place without. Your chances of finding anything recognizable at plain view that has been under water for 3000 years in that area is as good as nil. If something is found it was generally less than a few hundred years there li... [More]

LOL This is not going to be terribly pertinent, so my apologies, but that picture is just cool. I realize I also sound like a teenager saying this, but there you go. Reminds me of the Titanic. A truly enormous ship moldering away at the bottom of the Atlantic, slowly being eaten by rusticles. So I would have to agree with you, questionmark: if the Titanic as a wreck will have a short lifespan, a delicate assemblage of wood and bronze simply will not have survived 3,000 years at the bottom of the sea. There are things that survived, but mostly buried in sand or muck. If you want to find am anci... [More]

And you don't know this beyond the shadow of a doubt either Anyone ever read Robert MorningSky's version in his book The Terra Papers where it was the Sirian Wolf humans whose ships were the ones that parted the Red Sea and the Ark was actually a box that housed crystals with the actual history of planet Earth?