We now come to the last of the Six Main Theories for the Exodus route which I renamed in the last Nugget as the South Eastern Tiran Straits Route. I needed to distinguish this route from Route 5 – The South Eastern Nuweiba Route. There are many theories which have placed Sinai in Midian, to the east of the Gulf of Aqaba. The first to suggest this was Charles Beke in 1870 in Discoveries of Sinai in Arabia and of Midian. Both of these two modern theories for the routes involve crossing the Gulf of Aqaba and the choice of Gebel al-Lawz biblical Mount Sinai, on the eastern side of the Gulf of Aqaba. The proponents for Route 6 are Roy Knuteson, James Irwin, Bob Cornuke, Larry Williams and Steve Rudd. The majority of these men are adventurer seekers. The most notable exception is Dr Roy Knuteson who is a Professor of Biblical Archaeology, who established the Bible Archaeology Search and Exploration Institute (BASE) Each of these six men were inspired by the discoveries of Ron Wyatt which spurred them to search for evidence in the area to the east of the Gulf of Aqaba, around Gebel al-Lawz.
This group of men had similar difficulties with the crossing site at Nuweiba for similar reasons as expressed in the previous Nugget. Roy Knuteson decided the plain of Nuweiba was too small to contain the population required for the number of Israelites and he and others of his group felt the better choice of location for the entrapment of the Israelites was on the south eastern tip of the Sinai Peninsula. They felt the names Migdol (fort), Pi-Hahiroth (mouth of the canal) and Baal Zephon were general enough names and more likely to be found close to the location of Gebel al-Lawz. They held the view that Paul’s reference to Arabia in Galatians 4:25 places Mt Sinai in Saudi Arabia. They also argue that Numbers 10:30 where Hobab said “he had to return to his land and family” (Midian) places Mt Sinai on the eastern side of the Gulf of Aqaba. This was where Ron Wyatt claimed he was arrested and held for 78 days and finally released by the Saudi Arabian government and told not to publish anything nor remove any artefacts from the site.
Furthermore, these intrepid explorers claim they have found:
- a land bridge across the Straits of Tiran that is only two miles in length and shallower than the Nuweiba crossing.
- the bitter wells at Marah
- twelve springs at al-Bad’ and the caves of Moses and Jethro
- an altar of the Golden calves with petroglyphs of bovines
- the altar of Moses and the twelve pillars
- the blackened rock on the top of Jebel al-Lawz which is proof of the fire on Sinai.
- the split rock of Rephidim
Steve Rudd has developed all of these discoveries in true Ron Wyatt fashion into a 47 day adventure expedition into the Wilderness of Sinai in the area of “Saudi Arabia”. Here is one of Rudd’s maps for you to see the details.

There are many features of this map and the list of claims by the proponents that many critics have challenged. Not only do I want to test the routes suggested by comparing each with the fit to the biblical text but I also wish to match the route with the timing suggested in the account found in the Bible. I also wish to test for the gold standard locations. By that I mean the sites that are essential to match locations in the route with the locations that have archaeological evidence to substantiate the claim that the location matches what was found there. As I quoted David Rohl in the previous Nugget, “Bring me up one chariot wheel from the sea [from this location] and I will be convinced.” What is true for the crossing point is also true for Serabit al-Khadem (Wadi Mukatteb), the rock at Rephidim and some other sites. Is there any linguistic or archaeological evidence at each site which gives the substantiating proof that would lead us to believe this indeed is the site mentioned in the Bible?
The first two elements on Steve Rudd’s map which give me cause to doubt the veracity of what is claimed is the fact that Etham is labelled as Day 6 and the statement in the black box that the journey from Daba’ to Tiran is 17 days and the journey from Tiran to Lawz is 11 days. Daba’ is Tel ed-Daba’ or Avaris, the city of the Israelites’ departure point. The journey through the first three locations to the crossing point should take three days. Many have a problem with the time taken to get the crossing point for any of the routes suggested. The fact that the Egyptian army with chariots was pursuing the Israelites to the crossing point requires a faster journey. To require them to travel the entire length of the Sinai Peninsula before reaching the crossing point is a major problem in my mind. Not only that, but in doing so, it by-passes the significant gold standard places where we have evidence of Jewish presence, which adds doubt to the claim.
Now let me address the claims that are made from the above bulleted list.
The Tiran Straits land bridge: The land bridge needs to be 11 miles not just two. The land bridge is not flat and actually includes coral reefs. The British Admiralty map 801 and the US NOAA map 62222 show the sea bed in the middle of the channel has depth of 215 metres (700 feet) which spans a gap of 1,200 metres or 3/4 of a mile. The eastern slope at the Tiran straits has a 60 degree incline.
The Bitter Wells at Marah and the Twelve springs at al-Bad’ and the caves of Moses and Jethro: are not in a location which logistically and geographically make sense.
An altar of the Golden calves with petroglyphs of bovines: Rock carvings of cattle are found all over the deserts and not unique to Gebel el-Lawz. David Rohl has found thousands of such carvings on the Eastern Desert Survey (1997 – 2000). Most of the carvings have been dated to Predynastic Period of the 4th Millennium BC. They are all over the deserts of the middle east. Hardly proof that they are connected to the Golden Calf. Besides supposedly the text indicates to us that any such altar would have been destroyed along with the golden calf itself.
The altar of Moses and the twelve pillars: The altar at Gebel el-Lawz does not resemble an Israelite altar nor pillars. Rather it appears to be the foundations for a building complex. But nothing around it matches the time frame we are seeking. All around the area are shards of Nabatean pottery. The evidence put forward to argue for Gebel el-Lawz is inaccurate. The Nabateans were an Arabic kingdom dating from the 4th Century BC and not contemporaneous with the time period of the Exodus and Moses.
The blackened rock on the top of Jebel al-Lawz which is proof of the fire on Sinai: The blackened rock of Gebel el-Lawz is not due to volcanic activity or due to the fire and smoke on the mount. Rather it is basalt and granite with a darkly patinated crust of iron, manganese and clay, heavily weathered and exposed to the sun and accelerated by organic microbial activity. Not the result of a volcanic eruption or fire coming down from heaven.
The split rock of Rephidim: From the material I have read in David Rohl’s latest book, I have realised that Caldwell’s Rock (Nugget: The Rock at Rephidim) is actually near Gebel el-Lawz, in Midian. I have always associated it with the location of Rephidim in close proximity to Serabit al-Khadem or Wadi Mukatteb. In fact the Rephidim site Rohl refers to is a great distance away on the Sinai Peninsula. In actual fact there are split rocks all over the desert.
Finally, let me make one obvious comment which has bothered me about Ron Wyatt’s claims and now Steve Rudd and those who claim the Tiran Straits route to be THE ONE. That concerns the ‘rock at Rephidim’ being in Saudi Arabia and the idea that Paul’s statement related to Arabia means Saudi Arabia. In ancient times the whole of the area was called Arabia all the way to the Arabian Gulf. Suffice to say taking historical toponyms and apply them to modern day nation states is problematic. I could say much more about this relating to claims related to Arabia and/or Saudi Arabia. If you would like a copy my notes just ask me. There is much more to add on just what Paul’s ‘Arabia’ in Gal 4:25 is referring to which would make the Nugget far too long. I won’t add it here but if you are interested simply contact me on the website or email me and I will send you my notes on this issue.
Suffice to say this map of David Rohl’s makes the claims for the Nuweiba crossing nonsense and even more nonsensical for the Tiran Straits crossing.

These theorists have Etham located at the northern tip of the Gulf of Aqaba. Which means there is one campsite (Succoth) between the Delta and the crossing point which results in a 320 km (200 mile) journey between the two camps. Present day Wadi Tumilat is the universally accepted location for Succoth. The distance between Etham and Succoth according to Ron Wyatt’s is 180 miles. On the basis of Rudd’s map there would be a clear imbalance of camp sites on the Midian side. All the sites after the crossing point are then on the eastern side. Dophkah, Alush, Rephidim and Mt Sinai and beyond. Furthermore from Sinai (Gebel al-Lawz) onward is the part of the journey which most experts claim are pure speculation. Much of Rudd’s intricate map concerns most of the sites for which we have supposedly no information. That is not to say we don’t know, but they constitute the part of the journey for which we have little information.
Now where does that leave us. Seemingly I have given you the outline of six potential routes and squashed each one. What next? Are we back at square one and left with no viable route for the Exodus? I will address this question in the following Nugget. There is another possible route which I think is the most likely to account for the facts and which fits the order and geographic locations of the camps of Numbers 33. I will begin to unpack this one in the next Nugget.
fascinating and very interesting Dr Vail.