Overview: Challenging the literal interpretation of 600,000 leaving Egypt. Giving scriptural-friendly and archaeological-friendly alternatives to the common notion of the mass exodus from Egypt.
What first may appear as a trivial question, the issue of how many Israelites left Egypt and wandered in the desert is a complex topic that sheds light on biblical history and the veracity of the Torah as a whole. It deals with the archaeological data of the Ancient Near East we have of that period in history and explores various verses that seem to contradict each other and that give us a glimpse of a fascinating element in biblical history.
How many Israelites left Egypt and wandered the desert? The Torah, in multiple places, describes a vast number of Israelites leaving Egypt and traveling the Wilderness.[i] The number is put at around 600,000 men aged between 20 and 60. If we include the women the number would double to 1,200,000. The children under the age of 20 likely doubles that number, giving us a total of about two and half million.
There are reasons to take this number literally and many more reasons to take it non-literally. We will give the evidence for both sides and ultimately leave it to the reader to judge on the matter. After going through the evidence for both sides we will give possible explanations for a non-literal interpretation and also see if this approach fits with conventional Orthodox theology.
The reasons to take the 600,000 number as a literal number are quite straightforward and simple. Naturally, the first impression of a number is that it is literal unless there is strong evidence suggesting otherwise. There needs to be a strong case for a non-literal interpretation in order to consider it. Also, the number 600,000 is brought in multiple contexts suggesting that it is literal. Additionally, the number wagers over time from 603,550 to 601,730 suggesting an actual figure versus a random figurative high number. Additionally, the context of the number is mostly in a census taken for the specific purpose of knowing the number of Israelites there were in the desert. If this were merely a figurative non-literal number, the point of the census would seem useless. And finally, the literal number 600,000 fits the number of contributions for the Tabernacle mentioned in Ex. 38:25-26. If the number were intended to be non-literal, the contributions to the Tabernacle given by each individual wouldn’t have matched up.
But the evidence for a non-literal number are staggering.
Evidence for a non-literal number:
- There’s a rather shocking lack of archaeological evidence for a mass slavery in Egypt consisting of Israelite/Hebrew slaves. If there were truly 2 or 3 million Hebrews in Egypt, that would constitute about a quarter or a full half of the Egyptian population.[ii] Yet with all the inscriptions and papyrus left over, there is surprisingly low evidence for any such mass enslavement in Egypt and a grand mass exodus (see here). Also somewhat surprising is the lack of archeological evidence for a mass travel in the Wilderness (though this is less expected – see here). If we were to say that the number of Hebrews in Egypt and the desert was significant lower, that would answer why there’s almost no archeological evidence of the biblical account of the Exodus.
- The Israelites entered Egypt with 70 men.[iii] It’s difficult to know how many wives they had and how many of those men were actually children not yet married. So the total number of Israelites descending into Egypt from Canaan can generously be estimated at 200 (if we assume that many of them had two wives or concubines). In the span of 210 or 430 years (depending on which chronology is used[1]), the Israelite population would have grown 10,000 times its original number (or put differently, a 1 million percent growth rate) to the estimated 2 million, if we take the 600,000 number literally. This growth is unfathomable from a historical perspective.
To put things into perspective, the population during the first century ACE is estimated at 250 million.[iv] 1,800 years later, by the year 1800, the world population was estimated at almost 1 billion.[v] This is a 4 times increase over the original number in a span of almost 2,000 years. From 1800 to 2000, the world saw a major growth boom thanks to technological advances that allowed more babies to survive and extended the average lifespan of adults. By the year 2000, there were almost 7 billion people alive. So, from 1800 to 2000 – a 200-year span – we saw the largest growth rate humanity has seen: times seven its original population. Given this background, it becomes obvious how unrealistic it is for the Hebrews to have multiplied to 10,000 times its original number in just several hundred years.
Some will suggest that it was a miraculous reproduction rate above and beyond physical nature.[vi] But there is no indication in the verse for this. The verse merely says “the Israelites were fertile and prolific; they multiplied and increased very greatly, so that the land was filled with them.”[vii] A growth rate that was many thousand times greater than the universal growth rate surely should have been given much attention in the verses Yet there isn’t even a single reference to such a miracle.[2]
- Numbers 3:43 records the census taken of the first-born male children of each family/household (bekhor in Heb.). The total number of firstborn males age one month and up was 22,000. Now, if we are to assume that they actually totaled 2 or 3 million, then this 22,000 figure is far too low to be realistic. Taking the numbers at literal face-value, would mean that each family had about 50 children each! The relatively small number of firstborn males indicate that the Torah hasn’t intended for a literal 2 or 3 million Israelite population.[3]
- “It is not because you are the most numerous of peoples that the Lord set His heart on you and chose you—indeed, you are [from] the smallest of peoples.” (Deut. 7:7) Moses tells the Israelites that they are from the smallest of nations at the time. With a population of 2 or 3 million, the Israelites would have actually been from the very largest of nations. As archaeology and ancient inscriptions all indicate, the populations of the largest of nations were one or two million and not much more.[viii]
- Moses tells the Israelites that they will conquer the Canaanites, yet only slowly over many generations “lest the wild beasts multiply upon you” to inhabit the abandoned cities.[ix] Moses says that if the Israelites were to conquer all the Canaanite cities at once, then they wouldn’t be able to inhabit all the cities due to their smaller population than the Canaanites. Therefore they will only conquer it slowly so that they have the chance to multiply and actually inhabit the cities they conquer instead of the wild beasts inhabiting the empty cities.
Had the Israelites been a literal 2 or 3 million population, they would have swarmed into the vastly outnumbered Canaanites and could have inhabited their cities and have built many more to accommodate for their mega population of 2 or 3 million. The Canaanite population during its height at the early Bronze Age is estimated at 150,000 and by the time of the late Bronze Age – the time of the Israelite invasion – their population has decreased. Even by a generous estimate, their population comes nowhere close to a million, yet alone several million.[x] Even if these Canaanite population estimates are tremendously off of reality, there’s little chance that the Canaanites numbered more than a million.
On a similar note, the Israelites are described as being outnumbered by the Canaanites and needed divine assurance to gain morale to fight the superior armies of the Canaanites.[xi] However, with a force of 600,000 adult men, the Israelites would have fallen upon the Canaanites as locusts swarming a crop field. They would have vastly outnumbered the Canaanites had the number 600,000 been intended literally.
- Exodus 15:27 describes the Israelite travel to a particular desert oasis that boasted seventy date palms to feed the starving Israelites. To put this into perspective, each tree would have had to have fed 30,000 had there been 2 million mouths to feed.
- The descendants of Aaron alone were sanctioned to sacrifice to the Lord.[xii] If we are generous enough, we can grant that Aaron had several dozen male descendants who could have assisted him in the sacrificial service. It is unlikely that such a small group of people could have accommodated to the sacrificial needs of 2 or 3 million Israelites.[4]
What we are left with is a pile of staggering evidence that the Torah itself hasn’t intended for such a large population. Archaeology as well only supports a low number. So how many Israelites did leave Egypt if we don’t take the 600,000 number literally? This is a subject of debate with various bible scholars suggesting various figures. The numbers range from as few as a fighting force of 5,000 (which is a total population of about 20,000) to as high as a fighting force of 140,000 (which is a total population of about 500,000).[xiii] Point is, we cannot know how many Israelites left Egypt but it does seem highly unlikely that the 600,000 number was intended literally.
Possible explanations
Now that we finished examining the evidence that the Torah hasn’t intended for a literal 600,000 number, we still have one puzzling question: so what did the Torah mean with its census number total of six hundred thousand?
Adding to this confusion, is the lack of a coherent answer to this question. However, various explanations have been put forward on the table. We will briefly examine these options.
A very natural explanation is that the numbers represent a spiritual significance. Each tribe was given their number that represents their spiritual status.[xiv] The veracity of this theory is untested since it enters the realm of spirituality unknown to us. This explanation of numbers signifying a spiritual status may explain other numbers, like those given as the long lifespans to early mankind (see here). Many other kings-lists of that time and era also give an insanely long number of years to various early kings. These number of years may have been a way of expressing spiritual/symbolic significance of these individuals.
There’s also a mathematical equation that may support this theory. In the 24 numbers provided in Numbers Ch. 1 and 26, not once do the following numbers appear. Anywhere between 0 to 10,000, 10,000 to 20,000, 80,000 to 90,000, and 90,000 to 99,000. The ”hundreds” follow the same pattern as the “thousands.” There are no 0 to 100 figures, no 100 to 200, no 800 to 900, and no 900 to 999. These numbers (i.e. 0, 1 ,8, and 9) are the first two and last two in the ten-digit system. The chances of these numbers being absent in 24 total numbers is extremely unlikely. This seems to be symbolic purpose of why most numbers cluster to the middle (i.e. around 400 and 500) while the two edges (i.e. 0, 1, 8, and 9) are totally absent from the 24 numbers.[5]
A similar explanation is the theory of Gematria. Gematria is the equivalent value of every Hebrew letter in numerical value.[6] Interestingly enough, the Gematria of Children of Israel (bnei yisroel in Heb.) is 603. The Children of Israel (bnei Yisroel) were counted to be 603,550 in the census taken in Numbers Ch. 1. This is just an example of Gematria while the significance of the other Gematrias may not be known to us and why each tribe was assigned a certain number. This theory does have its issues though. It cannot adequately explain the total number given in Numbers 26 – 601,730. Also it cannot explain the extra “change” of 550 after the number 603 (i.e. 603,550).
Another likely possibility is that the numbers of the census were intentionally inflated. This was a common practice at the time in the Ancient Near East. Many kings or scribes would inflate/exaggerate the numbers of their military populations. They would do so as a sign of strength. In order to seem as a valid contender to these military foes, the Israelites had to inflate their numbers or else bear the military consequences of appearing weak in the face of their adversaries. The Israelites could have inflated their census numbers by ten or so in order keep up with the high numbers presented by other nations.[7]
A very intriguing theory is the translation of eleph as “clan,” “family,” or “unit.”[xv] Traditionally, the Hebrew word eleph has been translated as “thousand.” But what if we change the meaning of eleph to mean clan, family, or unit. On what merit, you ask? Well, that’s how the word is translated in many biblical verses. The Hebrew word eleph once had multiple meanings and depending on context it was translated differently.[8]
So, when the Torah says that the tribe of Reuben had 46 eleph (formerly translated as “thousand”) and 500 – it actually means that their tribe had 46 families or units – that each consisted of about 11 to equal in total – 500.
As intriguing as this theory is, it does bump into a major obstacle: the sum-total number. After each of the tribes’ numbers are counted separately, the census finishes off with the grand total number. The problem is that these numbers only work with a literal interpretation of the figures given to each tribe. If we are to count the “families” or “units” of each tribe, the total in Numbers Ch. 1 should have equaled 598 elephs. Yet the sum-total is 603 eleph (plus 550 change). This additional 5 eleph only comes if we take the number after the elephs to be hundreds. These hundreds (in change) within the count of each of the tribes eventually add up to equal five thousand, turning the eleph from 598 to 603. This indicates that eleph does in fact mean thousand, which is why the hundreds were able to add to the eleph number in the sum-total. The sum-total just doesn’t work out with the eleph as clan/unit theory.[9]
It is for this reason that the eleph as clan/unit theory must resort to a less traditional and less orthodox view. This view is that the Torah was edited at some point well after the census was written. The editor would have mistakenly thought eleph to have been “thousand” instead of being “clan,” “family,” or “unit.” He therefore would have sum-totaled it at 603,550 due to a misunderstanding of the original census.[10] The idea of a post-editor for Torah may seem radically unorthodox at first, but there’s actually much merit to that claim. See here for verses that were clearly written well after Moses’ times and see here for the possibility for there to be errors in Torah (at least scribal errors over the generations[11]). Even the Talmud suggests that Jeremiah the Prophet made a miscalculation and documented his error in his Book of Jeremiah! Same goes with Ezekiel in his Book of Ezekiel.[xvi] [12]
This eleph as clan or military unit theory is actually well supported from the mathematical equation we have made earlier. The reason why the numbers all cluster around 400 and 500 is because that was the reality of how many troops there were. If the tribe of Reuben, for example, had 500 troops, it is unlikely that other tribes would have numbers far off from that – e.g. <100, 100, 800, or >900. It is also more likely that more tribes would be clustered around that middle number (i.e. 400 or 500) than those veering off to the more side numbers (i.e. 200, 300, 600, and 700).
Ultimately, with the minimal data we have, we cannot decide conclusively on the matter. We don’t know if the Torah intended a literal number (in which case the question would be if the Torah was accurate) or if intended a non-literal number and what the number represents if not for literal numbers.
Chazal have interpreted numbers non-literally
At this point we may be wondering how theologically kosher it is to interpret numbers non-literally, from an Orthodox theological perspective. So we will now cite three examples in which the sages themselves interpreted numbers in the Torah as non-literal numbers.
In 1 Samuel 6:19 it’s written, “And He smote of the people seventy men, fifty thousand men.”
Sotah 35b comments on this verse:
“Rabbi Abbahu and Rabbi Elazar disagree over the interpretation of the verse. One says that there were seventy men, and each and every one of them was equivalent to fifty thousand men. And one says that there were fifty thousand men, and each and every one was equivalent to the seventy men in the Sanhedrin.”
There is also a Midrash in the Talmud[xvii] that says Abraham’s 318 men (mentioned in Gen. 14:14) were actually just his one servant Eliezer. There is another instance in Joshua 7:5 when 36 men died in the battle of Ai where the Midrash in the Talmud[xviii] interprets these 36 men as just one man.
These instances don’t prove anything but it does show that its theologically kosher to interpret numbers non-literally – especially when the evidence is so compelling. Ultimately, we haven’t decided whether or not the number 600,000 is literal or not, but we demonstrated the high likelihood of it being a non-literal number and have presented possible explanations for the number. It should be noted that the number 600,000 is merely a detail in the Exodus narrative and does not mean that we can start radically modifying the entire Exodus account.
___________________
[1] Ex. 12:40 suggests the Israelites were in Egypt for 430 years (see as well Genesis 15:13). However, many rabbis believed the Israelites were there for only 210 years (see Rashi on Genesis 15:13 quoting from Talmud Bavli Megillah 9a) and explain the verses different than their literal meaning (see here). Either way, the point we make remains the same no matter which chronology we use.
[2] It should be noted that the promise to Abraham that his descendants would multiply greatly (Gen 15:5) is surely fulfilled by even a much smaller growth rate than the one suggested with a literal 600,000 figure. Even if the number of Israelites leaving Egypt was “only” several thousand or tens of thousands that would still be an abnormal growth rate (though within the parameters of realistic growth rate). Moreover, the several-million population of the Jews during the Second Temple era could have fulfilled this promise (but see Deut. 10:22).
On a similar note, Pharaoh speaks to his people he tells them that the Hebrews have outnumbered them (Ex. 1:9). If the Egyptian population at the time was several million, wouldn’t this suggest that the Israelites were also several million? We can explain that Pharaoh was speaking to the elite class in Egypt, perhaps the bulk of the population in the capital Memphis of whom the Hebrews based in Goshen could have outnumbered with just a population of several (tens of) thousands. We can also explain the verse in a different manner that fits with the Hebrew wording and is actually the translation by many famous bible translations (https://www.biblestudytools.com/exodus/1-9-compare.html). Instead of Pharaoh saying that the Hebrews have outnumbered the Egyptians, he is saying that they have become far too numerous and are at the stage of being a threat (and this translation fits with the next verse perhaps better than the first translation).
[3] There are two possible answers to this but both seem unlikely. The first is that the census only counted the firstborn males born since the Exodus that happened just two years earlier (Num. 1:1). The problem with this theory is that this number is far too high for a two-year span. The Israelites’ population remained the same throughout the 40 years in the desert, suggesting that the birth rate wasn’t high in the Wilderness. This makes 22,000 firstborn males to be born in just two years to be extremely unlikely (remember that 22,000 firstborn male births would mean many more thousand regular births). Another big issue with this explanation is that the verse mentions nothing of this. It doesn’t limit the census to only those born after the Exodus. In fact, the verses repeatedly stress that it was all the firstborn male children.
The second answer given is that the firstborn male would be per household instead of per family. Men would often marry multiple women and would therefore have large families. These families could have had 50 or so children each – only one of which would be considered a male firstborn. But this too is unrealistic for several reasons. First of all, even men with multiple women don’t tend to have 50 children. Take the patriarch Jacob for example, who had four women with him and yet only 12 children. Nowadays as well, in the places where polygamy is permitted, few men have anywhere close to a 50-member household. Moreover, the verses throughout Torah that describe the genealogies of the Israelites never count remotely large households – yet alone 50.
[4] There were probably many sacrifices as there were many livestock brought along with the Israelites into the desert (see Ex. 12:38).
[5] It cannot be argued that the “edge” numbers are rounded to the closest thousand, since if that were the case, we would expect to see many more fully rounded “thousands.” But in reality, there actually isn’t even a single rounded thousand! All of the numbers have some “hundreds” in change.
[6] The concept of Gematria has roots in ancient Mesopotamian culture. For example, Sargon II stated: “I built the circumference of the city wall 16,283 cubits, the number of my name.” (K. R Nemet-Nejal, “Mathematics” in Daily Life in Ancient Mesopotamia Westport: Greenwood Press, 1998, p. 83.)
[7] More realistic numbers of Israelite fighting forces can perhaps be found in Joshua 4:13 where only 40,000 troops are used to attack the military stronghold of Canaan and in Judges 5:8 where the Prophetess Deborah can only muster together 40,000 troops from all 12 tribes of Israel.
[8] Eleph is translated in a variety of ways in the Torah: “thousand” (Ex. 18:21, Num. 10:36, 31:4, 31:5, Joshua 7:3, 1 Sam. 23:23), “cattle” (Deut. 7:13, 28:4, 18, 51), “clans” (Joshua 22:14, Judges 6:15, 1 Sam. 10:19, Isaiah 60:22, Micah 5:2), “divisions” (Num. 1:16), “families” (Josh. 22:21, 30), “oxen” (Isaiah 30:24, Psalm 8:7), and “tribes” (Num. 10:4).
[9] And of course there is the issue of the actual 550 in “change” that follows the 603 thousand. If the sum total is only to calculate the number of clans or families, then the number should have been a flat 598 or 603 – not 603 with 550 in change.
[10] This editor would have also added in verses like in Ex. 12:40 and Ex. 38:26.
[11] So if scribal errors are a possibility and a reality, then there’s no theological reason that there cannot be larger errors of full verses We already know that verses were added well after Moses’ times, so he may have errored in his understanding of the term eleph just as any scribe can error in their copying of the original document. Also see https://jewishbelief.com/genesis-historical-error/ for a discussion of full chapters of Torah being a possible error.
[12] Here is a rough translation of the Talmudic passage:
It is written, “[In the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month], a breach was made in the city“ (Jer.39.2).
And yet you say this (that it was breached on the 17th)?
Said R. Tanhum bar Hanilai, “There is an error in calculation here.“
That is in line with what is written:“In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came to me“ (Ezek.26.1).
“Son of man, because Tyre said concerning Jerusalem, `Aha, [the gate of the people is broken, it has swung open to me, I shall be replenished now that she is laid to waste].“`
What is the meaning of “Aha?“ [The cited verse indicates that Tyre rejoiced on the first day of the month.]
If you say that it was on the first of Ab, the city had not yet been burned.
If you say it was on the first of Elul, could a courier [who carries letters] go in a day and a night [i.e., in just a short time] from Jerusalem to Tyre?
- Yohanan and R. Simeon b. Laqish: R. Yohanan said, “It may be compared to a king who was sitting and making calculations. They came and told him, `Your son has been taken captive,` and he erred in his calculations. He said. Let this day stand at the beginning of calculations.“`
R. Simeon b. Laqish said, “It may be compared to a king who was sitting and making calculations. They came and told him, `Your son has been taken captive and prostituted.` He said, `Let this day stand at the beginning of calculations.“` - .Mana asked, “There is no problem as to why the calculations on what has happened should be thrown off [by the sorrow]. [That accounts for error.] But is that the case for what was going to happen [that Ezekiel, writing before the first destruction, should have been guilty of this error in his calculations]?“
[i] Ex. 12:37, Num. 1 and 26. Also see Ex. 38:25-26.
[ii] See https://www.thetorah.com/article/ancient-egypt-population-estimates-slaves-and-citizens
[iii] Genesis 46:26-27, Ex. 1:5, Deut. 10:22.
[iv] https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/international-programs/historical-est-worldpop.html
[v] https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/international-programs/historical-est-worldpop.html
[vi] See for example Midrash Tanchuma Shemot 5.
[vii] Ex. 1:7.
[viii] For a discussion on the methods used to estimate ancient populations, see A Demographic Analysis of Late Bronze Age Canaan: ancient population estimates and insights (can be downloaded here).
[ix] Ex. 23:29-30 and Deut. 7:22.
[x] A Demographic Analysis of Late Bronze Age Canaan: ancient population estimates and insights (can be downloaded here) page 131.
[xi] Deut. 7:17, Num. 13:25-33. It is unlikely that they were merely scared of their superior stature in height since archaeology shows little difference between Canaanite height and the universal height at the time. We must therefore say that the description of the giants in Num. 13:33 is exaggerative.
[xii] See Lev. 17:5.
[xiii] The Number of People in the Exodus from Egypt: Decoding Mathematically the Very Large Numbers in Numbers I and XXVI page 198.
[xiv] This view is championed by Dr. Joshua Berman in his work Ani Maamin p. 46-52.
[xv] For an in-depth thesis on this theory see https://www.thetorah.com/article/recounting-the-census-a-military-force-of-5500. Also see The Number of People in the Exodus from Egypt: Decoding Mathematically the Very Large Numbers in Numbers I and XXVI page 208 for a comparison of similar military unit numbers in the Ancient Near East.
[xvi] Talmud Yerushalmi Taanis 4:5 (23a).
[xvii] Nedarim 32a.
[xviii] Bava Batra 121b.
Your comment “This growth is unfathomable from a historical perspective” concerning the Hebrew growth rate of roughly 200 to 2M in 430 year is in itself unfathomably ignorant! Those numbers represent an average annual growth rate of about 2.24 percent which is extremely common. The current world population growth rate is about 1%. In the 1800’s in the US it was about 3%. Currently among Muslims it is about 2.5%. You guys are comical.
The calculation I was making was based on the population trends of that time. Of course, with the advancement of medicine and standards of life, populations increase rapidly nowadays, but in ancient times, such population growth is unheard of. If we were adamant to make interpret this figure literally, then perhaps we can say that the Israelites multiplied exceedingly fast. But since there is no theological mandate to take the figure literally, plus all the evidence to the contrary, I am inclined to believe in a miniature Exodus. I respect your literalist approach and we can agree to disagree.
Be nice. No reason to be insulting.
My own belief is that some of the Torah is truly Divinely inspired and some of it is the product of mankind and includes scribal errors, which include the census data represented here. But how are we to determine what comes from God and what is the product of man? My solution is as follows. Wherever God actually speaks in the text, that is God’s Word. “Thus sayeth the Lord…”or “The Lord spoke unto Moses…”the words from there are God’s inspired words. The census data is not God’s word because God never actually spoke the words containing it.
The rational believer must have skipped the two parts in the bible, One: That despite the hardship the Jewish people multipled greatly in Egypt. Two: the bible numbers the men for the army of 600,000 So ad one wife and 2 or more children, simple math gives at least 2.4 million people. Even if you adjust down to unmarried men with no family or wife, not likely in cultures of the day you would have in the very least 2 million. To me the rational believer is more “The Rational Unbeliever” in essence.
Populations of that time grew at a tiny rate per generation, mainly due to high mortality rates, war, and famine. Given that, plus the arguments laid out in the article, it is a safe assumption to say that likely much less Israelites left Egypt than the literal number recorded.
As for your strange comment about “The Rational Unbeliever”, I would just point out that not every believer needs to confirm to your specific beliefs and doctrines.