Brook of Egypt - Identification Based On Archaeological and Geographical Evidence

Identification Based On Archaeological and Geographical Evidence

While Rhinocolura (a variant of Rhinocorura) in the writings of Pliny and Josephus apparently refers to El-Arish, archaeologists have found no evidence of occupation at the site prior to the Hellenistic period suggesting that this was not identical to the locality Rhinocorura mentioned by Strabo and Diodorus Siculus which had been settled by Ethiopians. Thus the Rhinocorura mentioned in the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 27:12 cannot be assumed to be the Wadi El-Arish. The name was also used for an entire district in the vicinity of Pelusium.

The account of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt is also consistent with the identification of Nachal Mitzarayim with the Pelusian arm and not the Wadi El-Arish. The crossing of the Red Sea is the departure from Egypt according to Exodus 13:18 and is understood to have taken place at the section of the Red Sea which lay south of the Pelusian arm (known today as the Gulf of Suez). The Red Sea, like the Nachal Mitzrayim is described as part of the border of the Land of Israel (Exodus 23:31). Following the crossing, the Israelites were in the wilderness of Shur (Exodus 15:22) which is identified as lying west of the Wadi El-Arish.

Assyrian texts describing Sennacherib's invasion of the region of Pelusium mention Nahal Musri (a cognate of Nachal Mitzrayim). Egyptian inscriptions from the 19th Dynasty show that the Pelusian arm of the Nile was considered to be the eastern border of Egypt.