[stanz]

The general consensus among those who accepted the Exodus as an historical event was that the Pharaoh Rameses II was the central figure. Later, some speculated that Merenptah, a son of Rameses might have been the more accurate choice. This was based on chronological assumptions and the fact that his mummy bore a peculiar feature. His remains, particularly his face was cracked and crumbling which is atypical of the type of embalming performed during that period on a royal personnage. Some felt that salt (from the Red Sea) was responsible for his dessicated condition.
At any rate, students of Egyptology reject the story of the Exodus and maintain that the Hebrews were never in bondage - - -at least to the extent described in the Bible.

[Dog Gone]

The problem with that is that those pharoahs reigned during Egypt's golden age and there is nothing recorded in Egypt during this time which bears the slightest resemblance to the events of the Exodus.

There is no record of famine, destruction of crops, massive destruction among cattle and other domestic animals, dreadful pollution of the Nile nor economic ruin of Egypt.

[RightWhale]

The Parting of the Red Sea is the most remarkable Passage in the story. Means nothing in translation, of course.