• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Where did Exodus 5:7 take place (needs a lot of straw)

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala @IndigoChild5559

How come the people who wrote the Torah didn't choose Vadnagar, Gujarat, India, and change to their new location to be their canaan that they'd later changed their name to Yisrael Israel? Instead, they chose Ghuram India (Canaan) and replaced it with their location, Canaan (Yisrael, Israel).
Because the story is about a family and a people who live in Canaan, not India. India has its own stories. It is absolutely ridiculous that you think you can misappropriate the story in this way.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
This is tricky. Abraham lived in Canaan. Moses led exodus to Canaan. So there have to be two places named Canaan.

I'll add an edit: I understand Yadavas travel from the Indus Valley to Yisrael, or Israel. I finally understood that Canaan was located in Ghuram, India. So that means Canaan is in a different location than Yisrael or Israel.

Place Ghuram
Semitic Name Ai, Bethel, Canaan
Hindu Name Ayodhya, Kosala

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala

What more do you know about this name, Bethel?
It's interesting that there are three Semitic names: Ai, Bethel, and Canaan.
 

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
What more do you know about this name, Bethel?
It's interesting that there are three Semitic names: Ai, Bethel, and Canaan.
My understanding is that Ai is the Site of Ghuram.

Bethel is a place west of Ghuram on the banks of the river Ghaggar and Canaan is the name of the larger area where both Ai and Bethel are located.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
My understanding is that Ai is the Site of Ghuram.

Bethel is a place west of Ghuram on the banks of the river Ghaggar and Canaan is the name of the larger area where both Ai and Bethel are located.

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala


1723651846800.png


Location of Hill if Ai to the east; and Ghaggar River to the west of Bethel. Photo: Adapted from Google Earth by Author @Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Thank you for explaining this.

Interesting seeing Abraham's tent. What was that about a tent?

Did Abraham (Rama) stay there for long?

How did they make tents back when?

Because usually there's buildings made from burned-bake bricks, or were there mainly tents during the Abrahamic (Rama) era and no burned-bake bricks yet, needing a lot of straw? 50% of straw needed to make burned-bake bricks
 

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala


View attachment 95677

Location of Hill if Ai to the east; and Ghaggar River to the west of Bethel. Photo: Adapted from Google Earth by Author @Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Thank you for explaining this.

Interesting seeing Abraham's tent. What was that about a tent?

Did Abraham (Rama) stay there for long?

How did they make tents back when?

Because usually there's buildings made from burned-bake bricks, or were there mainly tents during the Abrahamic (Rama) era and no burned-bake bricks yet, needing a lot of straw? 50% of straw needed to make burned-bake bricks
Personally, I think that the tent is an interpolation. Abraham must have lived in a city which was probably located on the mount of Ghuram. The tent was an interpolation to make it consistent with the biblical narrative of him being a shepherd.
 

Tamino

Active Member
The conflict of the Pharaoh with the Hebrews was on straw. Straw input in mud bricks is only about 1% by weight while it is 50% in burnt bricks.
Let's do some basic math, shall we?

How much, exactly, is "1% by weight"?
And are we considering the weight of the fresh, moist mud brick or the fully dried mud brick?

Let's assume it's dried brick... I looked up the dry weight of clay and sand (the main components of mud bricks) and even took the lighter end of the range at 15 kN/m3.
That is a weight of 1529.6 kilograms per cubic meter, if the entire brick is dry and does not contain any straw.
If we assume a size of one brick at 33x20x10 cm you can fit 15 bricks into 1m3 and the m3 would yield 150 bricks.

If I want to replace 1% of that weight with straw, how much would that be?
1% of 1529... I'd have to add about 15 kilograms of straw per cubic meter or 150 bricks, right?

Well, a handy list for farmers, helping with volume calculations for feed and bedding, tells me that 1m3 of loose straw weighs about 40 kilograms, so I will need about 1/3 of this volume to get to 15kg of straw. 0.33 m3

A nice, large round basket of 60cm diameter and 40cm height has a volume of 0.11 m3

Conclusion: to make 150 mud bricks that contain only "1% in weight" of straw as tempering... Still requires 3 large baskets of straw that needs to be gathered, transported and cut into small bits.
(And that's if we're calculating with the most generous estimates of the given material)

Just saying.

I mean, I don't think any of your "exodus from India" arguments are very strong, but even this one does not turn out to work very well.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
Let's do some basic math, shall we?

How much, exactly, is "1% by weight"?
And are we considering the weight of the fresh, moist mud brick or the fully dried mud brick?

Let's assume it's dried brick... I looked up the dry weight of clay and sand (the main components of mud bricks) and even took the lighter end of the range at 15 kN/m3.
That is a weight of 1529.6 kilograms per cubic meter, if the entire brick is dry and does not contain any straw.
If we assume a size of one brick at 33x20x10 cm you can fit 15 bricks into 1m3 and the m3 would yield 150 bricks.

If I want to replace 1% of that weight with straw, how much would that be?
1% of 1529... I'd have to add about 15 kilograms of straw per cubic meter or 150 bricks, right?

Well, a handy list for farmers, helping with volume calculations for feed and bedding, tells me that 1m3 of loose straw weighs about 40 kilograms, so I will need about 1/3 of this volume to get to 15kg of straw. 0.33 m3

A nice, large round basket of 60cm diameter and 40cm height has a volume of 0.11 m3

Conclusion: to make 150 mud bricks that contain only "1% in weight" of straw as tempering... Still requires 3 large baskets of straw that needs to be gathered, transported and cut into small bits.
(And that's if we're calculating with the most generous estimates of the given material)

Just saying.

I mean, I don't think any of your "exodus from India" arguments are very strong, but even this one does not turn out to work very well.

So straw is fuel in making burnt baked bricks.

@Tamino I'm looking forward to what @Bharat Jhunjhunwala will say about this as you asked detailed questions.

Meanwhile, I'll also further research. Because I want to.
After this post: I'll be looking further to your questions @Tamino

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Maybe my question isn't a question due to straw being the fuel in making burnt baked bricks. So no straw in brick then due to straw is fuel?

I'll ask anyways. As I'm researching bricks further.
Does straw help burn these bricks compared to other ways to burn bricks? Can other ways of making bricks also be called burnt-bake bricks, or only an amount of straw is needed to qualify for this name, burnt-bake bricks?

If Egypt has lots of stones, did this cause no need to make lots of bricks due to already having stone to build from, and that Indus Valley doesn't have much stone, but look at all the mountains? So these mountains in Indus Valley don't have hardly any stones, really. What are mountains made of in Indus Valley, and how does one grow plant fiber in the mountain area to even gather lots of straw later? Wouldn't it be better to grow plants on flat lands?

The amount of straw was before burning? So 50% of straw is before burning?

After this post: I'll be looking further to your questions @Tamino


Straw is used as a binding substance in the making of mud bricks and as fuel in making baked bricks. The Biblical Archaeology Society Staff says that only 0.6 per cent straw by weight is added as a binder in making mud bricks.[6] In comparison, my discussions with brick kiln owners in India indicate that about one-half of the cost of production of making baked bricks consists of straw.

Mud bricks made in Egypt “rarely added straw temper,” and baked bricks were used only sparingly.[7] In comparison, baked bricks were the main construction material in the Indus Valley, including at the site of Chanhu Daro, which we suggest was the Biblical Mitsrayim.[8] The conflict over collection of straw is, therefore, more likely to have happened in the Indus Valley. The baked bricks made here required large amounts of straw.
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Where did Exodus 5:7 take place (needs a lot of straw)
If Egypt has lots of stones, did this cause no need to make lots of bricks due to already having stone to build from, and that Indus Valley doesn't have much stone,
how does one grow plant fiber in the mountain area to even gather lots of straw later?
True Egypt has lots of stones, must be admitted, and Egypt doesn't need straws to bake the bricks, Okay, right?

But one need not stone the argument of our friend @Bharat Jhunjhunwala , he might be catching at a straw(/s) to bake bricks to make as strong his argument as a rock; some times the peer review people have the capacity to make a mountain out of a molehill, one never knows, please, right, if not wrong?

Regards
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member

Q: How did Egyptians make mud bricks?

Ans:
Egyptians used mud bricks mainly for the worker’s quarters. The edit about one percent straw to the mud as a binder. The mud blind itself does not hold together. So some amount of straw is added to give it strength and they use it to dry in the sun and use those mud bricks.

How much, exactly, is "1% by weight"?
And are we considering the weight of the fresh, moist mud brick or the fully dried mud brick?

@Tamino
I would think when Mud is still wet, because how would one weigh straw after it's mixed in with the whole brick? So what if weighing the straw to be about 1%, then knowing how much is added? So what would this be? I don't even know.

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala
So was this straw weighted when mud was wet or already dried?

What's this:
Add straw. While the composition of the mud will affect the exact proportions, as a general rule, add a half pound of straw for every cubic foot of mud mixture
 
Last edited:

River Sea

Well-Known Member

How to Make a Mudbrick

  1. Mix topsoil and water to create a thick mud.
  2. Add straw. While the composition of the mud will affect the exact proportions, as a general rule, add a half pound of straw for every cubic foot of mud mixture. If you have access to grain chaff (a byproduct of threshing), you can use that as temper. If not, chop straw into very small pieces—called straw chaff—and use that.
  3. Knead the mud mixture with your bare feet for four days.
  4. Once it has fermented (after four days of kneading), leave the mixture alone for a few days.
  5. Knead the mixture again on the day you plan to form your mudbricks.
  6. Pour the mud mixture into molds (the shape of your choosing) and let them solidify in the molds for at least 20 minutes.
  7. Remove from molds and deposit on a drying floor layered with sand and straw to prevent the bricks from sticking to the floor itself.
  8. Let the bricks dry for a week.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
@Tamino @Bharat Jhunjhunwala


For a more authentic experience, and sturdier bricks, add straw ( around a half pound of straw for every cubic foot of mud mixture), and then KNEAD DAILY FOR FOUR DAYS, then leave the mixture alone for a few days before using (kneading the mixture one more time on the day you use it). This allows the straw to ferment which creates a chemical reaction in the mud that makes them three times stronger than regular clay.
 

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
Let's do some basic math, shall we?

How much, exactly, is "1% by weight"?
And are we considering the weight of the fresh, moist mud brick or the fully dried mud brick?

Let's assume it's dried brick... I looked up the dry weight of clay and sand (the main components of mud bricks) and even took the lighter end of the range at 15 kN/m3.
That is a weight of 1529.6 kilograms per cubic meter, if the entire brick is dry and does not contain any straw.
If we assume a size of one brick at 33x20x10 cm you can fit 15 bricks into 1m3 and the m3 would yield 150 bricks.

If I want to replace 1% of that weight with straw, how much would that be?
1% of 1529... I'd have to add about 15 kilograms of straw per cubic meter or 150 bricks, right?

Well, a handy list for farmers, helping with volume calculations for feed and bedding, tells me that 1m3 of loose straw weighs about 40 kilograms, so I will need about 1/3 of this volume to get to 15kg of straw. 0.33 m3

A nice, large round basket of 60cm diameter and 40cm height has a volume of 0.11 m3

Conclusion: to make 150 mud bricks that contain only "1% in weight" of straw as tempering... Still requires 3 large baskets of straw that needs to be gathered, transported and cut into small bits.
(And that's if we're calculating with the most generous estimates of the given material)

Just saying.

I mean, I don't think any of your "exodus from India" arguments are very strong, but even this one does not turn out to work very well.
Let us take your calculation to be correct for one cubic meter of mud bricks you require three baskets of straw, but one cubic meter of mud brick is a large amount and requires much heavier work than collecting three baskets of straw. Compare this with the amount of straw that you would require to burn the same one cubic meter of bricks. I am sure you will find that the straw required is about 100 times that you that can be used as tempering. We should not make this type of study on standalone basis, but always make it on a comparative basis and I am sure, no matter how you calculate the straw required in burnt bricks will be, much more than required in mud bricks.
 

Tamino

Active Member
Let us take your calculation to be correct for one cubic meter of mud bricks you require three baskets of straw, but one cubic meter of mud brick is a large amount and requires much heavier work than collecting three baskets of straw. Compare this with the amount of straw that you would require to burn the same one cubic meter of bricks. I am sure you will find that the straw required is about 100 times that you that can be used as tempering. We should not make this type of study on standalone basis, but always make it on a comparative basis and I am sure, no matter how you calculate the straw required in burnt bricks will be, much more than required in mud bricks.
Oh, I don't contest at all that burnt bricks in the Indian style require more straw than unbaked bricks of the Egyptian kind.
I just want to say that the scriptural detail about Jews having to collect their own straw in no way disproves an Egyptian location for the Exodus, since at least a certain amount of it is required, and having to obtain it is a noticable extra workload and hassle.
...
...
And anyways, the whole thing is entirely speculation and has very little weight as evidence:
If some guy in Babylon or Canaan is writing that in the first millennium, as I suspect it happened: What the hell does he know about the composition of Egyptian -style or Indian-style mud bricks, it's far more likely that he just wrote what would make sense in terms of Babylonian or Canaanite brick production.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala @Tamino

I wondered about location either India or Egypt: due to in Egypt there's a lot of stone to build from where in India there's not a lot of stone to build from so needed to make burnt-bake bricks and or even more mud bricks.

My thinking is even if Egypt made some bricks such as mud bricks, didn't need as many bricks due to relying on stone to build from

So when so and so ask to gather straw, why needing to gather when already relies on stone for their buildings

Is the Pyramid in Egypt made out of stone?

AI Overview
Learn more…Opens in new tab

The pyramids in Egypt are made of many different types of stone, including limestone, granite, and mortar:


  • Limestone: The Great Pyramid of Giza's inner core was built with limestone quarried from the Giza plateau. The pyramid also had a white limestone casing that was polished to make the sides smooth and shiny.
I asked: In India, are there these possibilities for building with stone, including limestone, granite, and mortar, or the lacking of stones so needs more bricks?

Even if there's some stone in India, how much is it able to rely on to build from, if not enough, then relying on bricks compares to Egypt, more with ease to build from stone, so no need for many bricks.

If they can build with stone, why need bricks?

India lacks stone, so it needs bricks and reasons for lots of straw, compared to Egypt, which has plenty of stone to build from, even if using mud bricks, yet less of and not enough to need to gather straw at that time, when so and so demanded.



Baked bricks saw widespread use largely during the Mature Harappan phase.

1723991460755.png


Compared to Egypt? How many buildings are made from Bricks compare to build with stone?


In Egypt: This is stone with no straw needed

1723991823299.png


So questions: how much stone is there in India compared to Egypt? If Egypt has lots of stone, would Egyptians prefer to build with stone or would they ignore the stone and make bricks with straw?

India doesn't have a lot of stone, so it can't rely on stone to build from, so there is a need to make bricks that use straw. Or does India have a lot of stone too to use, but then if so, how come in India they'd ignored the stone and made bricks then that needed lots of straw?

That's my question?
 
Last edited:

Tamino

Active Member
My thinking is even if Egypt made some bricks such as mud bricks, didn't need as many bricks due to relying on stone to build from

So when so and so ask to gather straw, why needing to gather when already relies on stone for their buildings
Only tombs and temples were built from stone.
Private homes, storage houses and even royal palaces were usually built from sun-dried mud brick.

Stone is far more expensive and difficult to obtain. You need to find a suitable quarry, extract the stone, transport it to your construction site, and chisel it into a suitable shape.
Mud brick, on the other hand, can be easily created on-site with readily available material and shaped with wooden implements.
Even if you take into account that much stone was just stolen from older buildings and reused, mud brick is still the cheaper building material.

Unbaked bricks are vulnerable to water, but in a desert climate with very little rainfall they are a perfectly viable construction material and even provide excellent insulation against the heat.
 
Top