Some readers dismiss the Bible as unbelievable for various reasons that may include its incredible claim that there were more than 600,000 Israelite soldiers among those who left Egypt in the Exodus.[1] Factoring women, children, and aged men the total population by this reckoning would have numbered at least two- to three-million people. 

Anyone even vaguely familiar with the demographics of the ancient world in the time of Exodus (12th century BC) would recognize these numbers cannot be accurate, that such a population could not have survived in the Sinai as the Bible describes, and that a force of that size would have exceeded the largest armies of the ancient world many times over. 

So, does the text we have today really mean what it says in modern translations? Or has there been some alteration of the original text? The text original text has been altered. There is no other explanation.

The problem of the incredible numbers was apparently introduced by a copyist hundreds of years after the events of Exodus when (in his time) the meaning of a key word, ’eleph (אֶלֶף) meant 1,000; but this was not what the term meant to the original author. The author (presumably Moses) likely meant by the term a small military unit of 5-15 men. 

The original text (Exod. 12:37) correctly says there were 600 ’elephs of military men who went forth from Egypt in the Exodus. But it is not correct to say there were 600,000 of them. The likely actual number of Israelite men was probably about 5,500, suggesting that the total population of Israelites that departed Egypt in the Exodus was around 20,000.

How Can We Know This?

By deduction. These numbers are grossly inconsistent with the military realities of the time and the demographics of the ancient world. If the Israelite army actually numbered more than 600,000, it would have been 25– to 30 times larger than the Egyptian army at the time (which may have numbered 20,000 to 25,000—or at most 40,000 by one estimate).[2]  An Israelite force of this size would have been larger than the entire Roman imperial army at its greatest strength under Augustus, which numbered about 140,000 in 28 legions plus 160,000 in the auxilia. [3] 

What Did the Author Intend?

Of the several attempts to uncover the origin of the problem of the numbers over the last century, William Flinders Petrie’s solution (1906: 218; 1911: 42 ff) is still compelling since it shows how a late copyist in the monarchial period must have merged two distinctly different sets of numbers by assuming the key term meant “1,000” when it did not. This table from the Num. 1 census illustrates how this conflation must have occurred: 

 When the number of “hundreds” (in the right column) exceeded one thousand, it appears the copyist moved the thousand digit “5” (of 5,550) to the thousands column producing the erroneous result of the first census as: 598+5 (thousands) and 550 (hundreds) for a total of 603,550. This should actually read, 598 ’elephs comprising 5,550 men at arms.

This error was repeated in the Num. 26 census. In that census the digit “5” from the 5,730 sum of the “hundreds” column was moved to the 596 “thousands” column to become 596+5 thousands, leaving the hundreds column 730. The result is 601,730. 

When the unrelated sums are separated properly, realistic values of 5,550 and 5,730 men of military age respectively can be derived from the two censuses. This total force of 598 and 596 ’elephs is in close agreement with Exod. 12:37 which lists 600 ’elephs—the number of men at arms that departed Egypt in the Exodus.[5]  From these figures one may project the number of dependents of these men and come up with a reasonable total Israel population of about 20,000 souls.[6]

Contextual Support: The Setback at Ai

Understanding an ’eleph as a small military unit or troop averaging maybe ten men (more or less) provides insight into the account of the Israelite defeat at Ai by Joshua’s forces after the taking of Jericho. According to Joshua 7:4–5, about three “thousand” (’elephs) were sent against the small site of Ai. The force was repulsed, losing 36 men killed. 

The magnitude of this loss devastated the Israelites for it appeared God had turned his back on the cause of Israel. The true significance of this setback becomes apparent when the three thousands/’elephs are understood to represent virtually the entire force sent against the handful of defenders at Ai. The three ’elephs may have approximated 36 men with only one or a few surviving the encounter.[7]

Commanders of Thousands

The listing of the military hierarchy as commanders of thousands, then hundreds, fifties, and tens in several texts would seem to suggest that the thousands numbers were in fact larger than the hundreds units, in contradiction to the logic above. However, there is a simple explanation for this: That is, there were only twelve commanders of the thousands, and these were the tribal chiefs. These individuals commanded all the ’elephs within his tribe thereby subsuming all military units with the largest being units of hundreds.[8] 

What About the Supporting Texts?

If this explanation is correct and a hypothetical copyist introduced this altered meaning of ’eleph centuries after the original text was written, there remains the problem of “supporting texts” that reinforce the literal meaning of 1,000. 

For example, Exod. 28:25–26 records the half-shekel poll tax collected from the men able to go to war as 100 talents + 1,775 shekels. Converting talents to shekels, summing, and dividing by two equals 603,550 (the supposed exact count of the first census of combat troops in Num. 1:46). 

Numbers 2:32, likewise, totals the tribal encampments surrounding the tabernacle in the first census. These numbers are also 603,550. How can this be? The evidence supports the conclusion that this later copyist deliberately introduced these changes to the original text to reconcile his altered interpretation of the term ’eleph, a meaning that cannot be what the original author intended. 

The ’eleph term appears in several Old Testament passages, translated as thousand. But these translations may not be what the writer intended. Each time this word appears we should carefully examine the context to be sure “thousand” is the intended meaning of the author, especially in early texts. For example, in Judg. 1:4, the tribe of Judah went up and defeated “10,000” (i.e., 10 ’elephs) of the Canaanites and Perizzites. The writer no doubt meant between 50 and 150 men (ten ’elephs ranging from 5 to 15 per ’eleph). (The demographics of the time are inconsistent with the 1,000s numbers.)

Likewise in Judg. 15:15, when Samson struck down “a 1,000” Philistines (one ’eleph) with the jawbone of an ass, the writer likely intended 5 to 15 men—still an impressive feat. 

Every Old Testament text in translation that mentions “thousand” should be examined for the historical period and the context to decide the likely intended meaning.

See The Bible and the Origins of Ancient Israel (forthcoming) for an in-depth exploration of this subject.

[Citations below are keyed to the bibliography of The Bible and the Origins of Ancient Israel. If you want the full citation email me for that or a complete bibliography.]

___________________

[1] Exod. 12:37 in all translations specify that 600 “thousand” men journeyed south from Raamses (Rameses) to Succoth on the first leg of their Exodus; the military census of Num. 1:46 totaled about 600 “thousand” men as does the second census about 40 years later (Num. 26:51). While the Exod. 12:37 text, understood as 600 ’elephs (as defined below) is literally correct, the original meaning of term ’eleph cannot be 1,000. In later biblical times this same term had evolved to mean literally one thousand. When the LXX (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) appeared in the third century BC the term Hebrew term אֶלֶף was rendered as χιλιάς—which means thousand. And so, the original meaning was obscured.

[2] J. Hoffmeier (2005: 154, n. 31); F. Hassan (1997a: 67).

[3] J. Lloyd (2013); and J. Jeffers (1999: 175, 315).

[4] The “hundreds” numbers are obviously rounded; perhaps these were recruiting quotas. For lack of any other information on the actual numbers these figures at least give a sense of the ballpark size of the Israelite population.

[5] See W. Petrie (1911: 42–46).

[6] The total population estimate of the Israelites has ranged from 5,500 for Petrie to 72,000 for J. Wenham (1967) and 140,000 for R. Clark (cited by K. Kitchen (2003: 265, note 51).

[7] The number of men in an ’eleph varied in the second census from 5 to 16. This is determined by dividing the ’eleph numbers of each tribe into the sum of the hundreds numbers to find the average number of men in an ’eleph.

[8] There are twelve of these individuals (Num. 1:5–16). They are referred to in the Septuagint (LXX) as χιλίαρχοι Ἰσραήλ (commanders of thousands of Israel) which renders the Hebrew ’eleph as χιλιάς in the Greek (literally “thousand”).