Thanks…am going to look into this, but I did read that “straw was not used typically in Canaan for making mudbricks…” etc in another source. This is why I thought the one method distinguished itself as territorial in scope. And the author of that chapter is an Egyptologist …it’s a small point and, as others have said, these bricks got recycled into still other building projects or vanish altogether, so the issue takes another turn with that bit of data.
Though it can matter in determining where (and when) the stories were written. Admittedly given how common mud bricks (with straw) were it doesn’t help much.
1 Like
Came across this you tube video a few days ago. It explains how clay is formed.
And then there is always Wikipedia
2 Likes
The context of the story seems to be that originally some third party was bringing the straw to the mud brick making site. The Hebrews were taking the earth at the site and mixing it with the straw and water [water also presumably close at hand) than molding the bricks. The bricks would be set out to dry. Eventually they would be transported to the building site. Pharaoh is depicted as removing the third party that was providing the straw, forcing the Hebrews to go elsewhere to gather the straw. which would take time away from the other tasks needed in making bricks.
Monumental buildings such as temples and pyramids were built with stone. Unfired mud bricks were used for ordinary construction. Probably there were also reeds huts for slaves. Unlike peter heaters one size does not fit all. They chose the construction material to suit the project, so you might have a stone temple surrounded by storehouses made of mud brick. You might build a wall on a stone foundation, unfired mud bricks, and fired clay tiles capping. This uses each material to its best advantage for strength, durability, and cost.
Mud can include mixtures of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and organic material.
Clay is a sedimentary material with grains smaller than 0.002 millimeter in diameter that is plastic when wet and hardens when dry, consisting primarily of hydrated silicates of aluminum and widely used in making bricks, tiles, and pottery. When fired irreversible chemical changes take place so that it will no longer soften in water. Not all clays are the same. You can look up kaolinite and bentonite for starters.
Silt is a non-plastic sedimentary material consisting of very fine particles intermediate in size between sand and clay.
You don’t need pure clay to make unfired mud bricks. I expect good quality clay would be reserved for pottery, tiles, tablets, fired bricks, and other purposes where ordinary mud wouldn’t work. However not all muds would be suitable for mud bricks. You don’t want pure clay but you don’t want zero clay either. If you are kneading the mix with bare feet you don’t want angular gravel that can cut you. Decayed organic material would be undesirable in general but fresh straw is deliberately added.
While making mud bricks isn’t rocket science there is also a lot of skill and experience required to make them well.
Details aren’t given but it is likely that straw from the harvest was collected and put into store houses for later use including mud bricks. So Pharaoh probably had plenty of straw available but refused to supply it.
Riversea— I think some are conflating the development and spread of the Indo-European language group with the idea of ancient biblical or Hebraic connections to the Indus Valley – which has a variety of soil types, depending on locale but nothing to do with Canaan. The only data we have on the rise of the Hebrew religion is the account of a man living maybe 4000 years ago in a region of the Ancient Near East—a populated community that worshipped a range of deities. At some point this individual came to believe in One God rather than the range of deities his countrymen worshipped. He did not travel to the Indus Valley but took a well-travelled road into a community where he could pursue monotheism (no matter how imperfectly his family did this), and this community is located in what we call southern Turkey, not the Indus Valley (which is Pakistan and India). And later the man came to believe God had given him and his descendants a “promised land” — which also was not the Indus Valley but what would be called Canaan. As for the Indo-Europeans, please see below–especially the last paragraph starting with “in the 16th century…”
Around the 12th century, similarities between European languages became recognised. In Iceland, scholars noted the resemblances between Icelandic and English. Gerald of Wales claimed that Welsh, Cornish, and Breton were descendants of a common source. A study of the Insular Celtic languages was carried out by George Buchanan in the 16th century and the first field study was by Edward Llwyd around 1700. He published his work in 1707,[4] shortly after translating a study by Paul-Yves Pezron[5] on Breton.[6]
Grammars of European languages other than Latin and Classical Greek began to be published at the end of the 15th century. This led to comparison between the various languages.[ citation needed ]
In the 16th century, visitors to India became aware of similarities between Indian and European languages. For example, Filippo Sassetti reported striking resemblances between Sanskrit and Italian.[7]
well…no apologies needed here, Klax. From what I have seen, even the most skeptical biblical researchers now admit that there were Semitic people living and working in the Nile Delta area…given the plethora of Egyptian-related names, etc. There are other reasons as well. Durant had a pet theory on the route of the Exodus, based on what he knew of the region in his day. The Exodus account does refer to known places from that era, which would have been unnecessary or unknown if no Semitic or Hebrew people had ever been there. There’s other reasons. I did once note, on this site, a book written by some British colonialist in the early 1930s. He described the regions of the Sinai that fit the biblical description given, but concluded that Moses was a con man who knew the region because he (Moses) had lived in that area for several years, maybe decades. In other words, he knew the terrain but Moses’ claims of a call from God were a con. So OK…to believe that explanation is a matter of personal conviction. To believe something else – such as that maybe such an event occurred — is also a matter or personal conviction. But people did, in that region, make treks of that sort, so it is hard to say that the Exodus story is entirely a con,. Just my thoughts…
Needing a lot of straw, in burnt bake bricks
All this is OK. The question is if so little straw was used in Egypt; and so much straw was used in Indus; could the Exodus be from the Indus?
Compare with the 22 parallels I give below from the Indus:
The first name although not of a person is of the creative power of Elohim is expressed in the Hebrew stem B-r-. The same stem B-r-is found in the Hindu name Brahman for the impersonal God although the names Elohim and Brahman are very different but the embedded meaning of the creative power in the stem B-r- are similar. Hence we consider them to be similar.
The second name is that of Adam, Adam was the first man in the Biblical tradition is parallel to Swayambhu Manu Swayam means “self” and Manu means “man” so self man means is self created man. Therefore, the embedded meaning of Adam as the first man and Swayambhu Manu as the self created person are parallel.
The third name is that of Eve and her parallel Shatarupa. The word Eve means “life or living” Now Shatarupa was the wife of Swayambhu Manu and her second name is Tanu and the name Tanu Krit means made by Tanu means “preserving life”. Therefore, a person who preserves life is Tanu Therefore, we find that the embedded meaning of Eve as life and Shatarupa or Tanu as preserving life are parallel.
The fourth name is that of Cain in the Biblical tradition and his parallel Indra in the Hindu tradition. The word Cain is derived from the Hebrew word “Qayin” which means spear and Indra’s weapon was a spear. Therefore, even though the names Cain and Indra are dissimilar but the meaning of Cain and Indra is both spear and therefore we consider them to be parallel.
The fifth name is Biblical Abel and Hindu Vritra who was killed by Cain or Indra. The word Abel is derived from the Hebrew word “Hebel” which means “vapour or breath” the word Vritra is itself not similar with Abel However, Vritra was a person who had enclosed the waters the Rig Veda says “O Indra , you Smotest Vritra… Let these life fostering waters flow” (Rig Veda 1:80:4). Now, Indra killed Vritra and let the water flow it indicates an association of waters with Vritra perhaps Vritra had stopped or enclosed the waters in the reservoir but the association with water is very clear. So, we find that Abel means vapour or water and Vritra had enclosed the waters. Therefore, we consider this to be parallel.
The sixth name is Noah and is parallel Vaivaswat Manu. Noah is written as Noach which is then also written as Manowach. Now, Manowach and Manu have both the same two measure consonants M and N. Therefore, we consider the name Noach or Manu to be parallel to Manu we may mention here that we do not find parallel to the names Ham Shem and Japheth in the Hindu tradition. So this is a case of silence there is no contradiction in names just as those persons are not mentioned in the Hindu tradition.
The seventh name is Biblical Arphaxad and Hindu Ikshwaku as you can see in this slide “A” is similar to “I”, “X” is similar to “Ksh” and “A” again is parallel to “A” . So, “A x a” or “I k s h a” are parallel and therefore we consider this name to be parallel as well.
The eighth name is that of Selach and his parallel Prithu. Selach means “to sprout” “to grow” and Prithu said to have milked the serials from the earth so how would you make the serial without making them sprout. Therefore, we consider the embedded meaning of these two names to be similar is that of other and his parallel Sagar in the Hindu tradition about means “the region beyond” where as Sagar it is said that he expanded the ocean the Valmiki Ramayana has a story where in Hanuman wanted to cross the sea then the sea self introduce himself that I have been expanded by Sagar. Therefore, expansion of the area is the common invaded meaning.
The tenth name is that of Biblical Peleg and his Hindu counterpart Bhagirath. Peleg means “channel”, as if water is flowing in the channel and according to the Ramayana Bhagirath brought the Ganga from the hills and divided the water into seven channels so the channel is the common embedded meaning.
The eleventh name is Biblical Reu and his parallel Hindu Raghu both have the same common sounds R and U
The twelfth is Biblical Serug and his parallel Hindu Shighrag again we have parallel sounds S, R and G
The thirteenth is Biblical Nahor and his counterpart in the Hindu tradition is Nahusa so the common sounds are N and H
The fourteenth is Biblical Terah and his counterpart in the Hindu tradition the Dasaratha the common sounds are T or D followed by R and H.
The fifteenth name is Biblical Abraham who was earlier known as AbRam and his parallel in the Hindu tradition is ofcourse Ram. So, Ram is the common name and we must know that the prefix “Ab” means father so AbRam means father Ram which is same as Ram in the Hindu tradition.
The sixteenth name is Biblical Sarah and her counterpart Hindu Sita here we find common sounds S and A However, the middle sound R and T are different. So we consider this to be half a similarity.
The seventeenth name is that of Haran brother of Abraham in the Biblical tradition and this word means “mountaineer” his counterpart is Bharata in the Hindu tradition which also means mountaineer.
The eighteenth name is Biblical Lot and he is parallel to Hindu Lakshmana here the beginning sounds L are common however rest is not common so we consider this to be half similar.
The nineteenth name is Moses father Amram and is parallel Krishna’s father Vasudeva the name Amram means “exalted people” where is Vasudeva has two parts the first part Vasu means excellent, good, beneficent and Deva means God. So Vasudeva means excellent God which is similar to exalted people hence we considered this to be parallel.
The twentieth name is Moses mother Jochebed and her parallel Devaki mother of Krishna. Jochebed is derived from Jehovah or God and Jochebed means “Jehovah is glory” where is Devaki is daughter of Devaka and Devaka means “divine or celestial”. So Devaki means daughter of the divine or celestial which is parallel to Jochebed meaning Jehovah is glory.
The twenty-first name is Moses and is parallel Krishna. Moses skin was dark at one time when Moses was at Mount Sinai God wanted to show his powers to him and he asked Moses to put his hand inside is cloak, and it is said that is hand became white then God again converted its normal color. So the skin becoming white means that the skin was not white before it became white which means it was dark.Therefore, we can say that the word Moses has a connection with darkness and the name Krishna directly means black, dark or dark blue.
The last twenty-second name in the Bible is Aaron and this is parallel to Hindu Balarama both have the common syllables A, R and N or M. In this way out of the twentytwo names which we find in both the traditions twenty are parallel and two are half parallel.
1 Like
No one is denying use of straw. The question is why conflict on 1-2% straw?
No.
Why would you ask such a question?
Klax. You would know that there is a lot of skepticism about authenticity of the Exodus narrative. I want to establish that the Biblical narrative is authentic–only we have been looking at the wrong place leading to skepticism.
I’m not sceptical of science and rationality from it in the slightest. Even if there were an Exodus of Canaanites back in to their homeland, then the probabilities, in rapidly descending order by exponentiating orders of magnitude applied to the sigmas, are from the Nile delta, Mesopotamia and the Indus. Why would science look in the wrong place?
AFAIK they used similar straw ratios. The proposal that the exodus took place from the Indus to Israel is farcical. How would you reconcile a journey from India with what is written in the Bible?
1 Like
Thanks Bharatjj. That is quite a list!!
I think you misunderstand what I was saying to this other person. That is that the possibility of Israel (or Hebrew or Semitic) people living in Egypt at some point is acknowledged even by those who are sceptical of an Exodus event --because of the number of names with Egyptian roots or influences that appear among some Hebrews. The chapters of Exodus 5-12 have many features consistent with an Egyptian environment in terms of geography and culture and sociology…Also details in the biblical account (such as the request for “time off” from work to go worship one’s god – has Egyptian sourcing to it. And the Egyptians were concerned about quotas in brick production, etc.
As I said, people certainly take this account (forget Cecil B DeMille for the moment) – in ways that fit their preconceptions. But the collapse of civilizations in that region at the time (read Eric Cline) also suggests an environment in which groups could break out and form societies on their own, in light of the turnoil and perhaps weakening of the old established “superpowers.”
It’s a long story…
As for your list…you seem intent on moving all of this into the Indus Valley region and/or equating it with Hinduism. Hinduism is a religion with a long history, but also multiple deities. The biblical tale begins and maintains throughout that there is only ONE God — not bunches of others and bunches of sub-entities. One God —and worship only the One. At some point around the turn of the third millennium BCE/BC — a man in a Sumerian (or post-Sumerian) town became convinced that the multiple deities of his region were false. He left his home and took a well-known route to a community in what is now southern Turkey, and he and his descendants were later promised a piece of land in what was approximately ancient Canaan. How the Indus Valley gets mixed up with this — beats me. Except for the fact that the Indu-European haplogroup cast a wide net — some groups went west into what is now Europe…others did end up in what is now Pakistan…And that is a general summary of what I have read.
Whether or not that ancient Sumerian man (Abram/Abraham) was from a family originally situated in the Indus Valley — is irrelevant to the current topic, so far as I can see.
As for your list —equating Brahman with Elohim…or Adam with Swayambhu Manu …these sound like big discussions for another place and time. Adam --and the concept of a “first” man created out of clay, or similar (not “self created man” as you say)— has a long pre-history and is found also in the ancient near eastern region–Egypt as well, I believe. You don’t have to go to the Indus Valley for it. Plus—the account in Genesis situates itself amidst the Tigris and Euphrates, Pishon, and Gishon rivers …so we have a locale that is not in Pakistan but rather still known as in the Middle East. Two of the four rivers are still in existence…Riverbeds which may have marked the path of the other two rivers have been located via satellite imagery…
More could be said, but no, I think this is enough. We are off topic as far as I can see.
Abram (not Abraham at that stage) came from Ur of the Caldees. This is well known as from the Babylon region in Iraq. That is no where near Pakistan or India…unless one want to completely forget that Persia lies to the east of it?
We have greek and Persian history talking about their travels to hindu/India. Clearly not where Abraham came from or went.
There is some problems trying to align the biblical story with India. Even going back to Noah’s flood…the Ark rested on the mountains of Ararat and the people moved down to an area near where the tower of Babel began to be built…likely not far away from Ararat…hence Iraq and not India. It’s a massive distance from Turkey to india…4220km. I think historically it would very very difficult to relate the Bible story with India…that’s a huge stretch of the imagination…even pure fantasy.
There is a “logos” article on the tower of Babel and subsequent founding of the Israelite people reads as if there were other deities for other nations mentioned in Dueteronomy 32…such as for hindu however, Deuteronomy 32:15 clearly says they foresook the one who made them (referring to Yahweh). Even the Bible has no scope for other creators in other religions…these were all false gods.
2 Likes
Due to your confirmation bias everything seems to match. God = people? Perhaps in your religion but certainly not in the religions you are trying to match.
No you can’t. As I pointed out, and you accepted, everyone around Moses would have been “dark” and therefore everyone would be connected to Krishna. Kind of destroys the point you are trying to make.
Even 1% for 1,000,000 bricks would be a lot of straw, hence a lot of conflict.
His theory is the Hebrews did forget where they came from.