Exodus Part Two: Population of the Exodus Group.

Hi,John, if we reduce the Exodus numbers to 6000, how many were killed at Mt.Sinai, 3000 or 300 or 30? Ex32:28

300 probably.

It's my theory that the Hebrew term "eleph" meaning "thousand" was written as "lp" and was identical to the hebrew word "alluph" meaning "chief" or "head" or "clan". Similarly, the terminology of "thousand" or eleph, in the original hebrew seems to suggest it was a military term before taking on the more exact meaning of a literal and numerical 1000.Similarly,the Century was a Roman company of troops (anywhere from 15 to 150) and was commanded by a "Centurian" but as time whent on the term developed gradually the numerical meaning of a literal 100.I feel that there are many copyist errors, editings, misinterpretations and some exaggerations in large numerical values all throughout the old testament.However, it may very well be that the original kernal of truth to the Census tradition (Numb.1) was based upon a counting system that went something like this:Reuben 46 500
Simeon 59 300
Gad 45 650
Judah 74 600
Issachar 54 400
Zebulun 57 400
Ephraim 40 500
Manasseh 32 200
Benjamin 35 400
Dan 62 700
Asher 41 500
Naphtali 53 400
-------
Total: 598 lp 5550I believe that this number means that there were 598 total clans, or divisions, with 5550 able bodied men 20 and up.The idea of "lp" meaning family or clan, has particular persuasivness to me, since each clan would have an average of 9 men if you divide 5550 by 598.My theory is that copyists, semi-over enthusiasticly combined the total as 598 THOUSAND and added the remaining 5550 to make a grand total of 603,550 fighting men. We know for a fact that my theory, as outrageous as it may seem, atleast makes more sense than actually believing there were really over 3 million Israelites in Canaan surrounded by Seven nations that were GREATER than themselves!3 million Israelites would imply that Canaan had something like 25 million inhabitants at the time, which is clearly a false fact. Canaan, c. 1400 to 1200 bc probably had 200,000 to 250,000 inhabitants MAXIMUM. (and that likely included my estimated 25,000 Hebrew/Israelites).Therefore, I have a hunch that Israel was only one eighth or one tenth the actual population of Canaan during the Exodus. Indeed they would have been a minority population. And yes, one could say it is a miracle that such a minority could take over a land inhabited by diverse people that outnumber them 8 to 1.Bottom line, I say there were 25,000 Isralites total, and the fighting force was about 5550 men.

Oops I just realized I already posted that same info a long time ago.

The exaggerated numbers of the exodus population among others, was probably elaborated upon by the P source, or Priestly code of 500 bc post exilic time period, these priets understood the symbology and reverence of large numbers and took off with it. I now believe that a 25,000 population using a 6,000 man army is still far too many people to wander in a desert for a many years.I find the 6,000 figure to represent the entire Exodus party of whome there were men, beside children, and this population may have included Hebrews,Shosu, and mixed peoples, possibly kenites and metal-smith workers who fled into Edom, and Midian (N. Arabia). Egypt would still have had control of much of Sinai at the time.Furthermore, this Exodus party of of whome Hebrews and slaves remember (1250bc) under the weakening Egypt, may have meshed with other Hebrews and Israelites who themselves remember an Exodus from Egypt 300 years earlier during the (Hyksos)Amurru expulsion from Egypt by Ahmoses. These traditions may have been tied together to represent one complete History in 700 bc when J and E sources were combined.

Based on what? How do you know the group included Shosu? Source? Didn't pharaoh's armies drown in the Sea of Reeds?Why does the Bible not mention any Egyptians after the sea episode? WHat do you mean by 'other Hebrews and isrealites'? Aren't all Israelites Hebrews?What other Hebrews were there apart from the Exodus group?If the Exodus was 1250-ish, why are there no signs of any settlement at Kadesh-Barnea (where the Exodus group camped for 38 years) before the 10th century BCE? Any evidence to support this? Don't you think it is more likely to be post-exilic?Brian.Edited by Brian, : Added Kadesh-Barnea reference.

do you have any evidence that the hyksos are hebrew, they are considered "semitic" but not hebrew, its a mistranlation equated with the hebrews, namely the mistranslation of hyksos as "shepperd-kings", but its wrong, as for egypt being weakened any evidence of this?
they never even ruled most of egypt only parts of it

I belive the 'Hyksos' were largely Amorites, or Canaanites from Syrio-Palestine. I furthermore believe that the ethnic afiliation of "Hebrews" didn't come about until 900-700 bc or later. Infact, I contend the Hebrews were simply a geographicaly broad social class, and likely one and the same as the early Habiri or Apiru who are mentioned some 200 times in ancient sources from 2150 to 1160 bc. I consider the Israelites to be one and the same as the Canaanites and Arameans (archaeologically speaking) up until 1100-1000 bc. The story of Joseph and Jacob in Egypt does, in my opinion, have deep roots in the Hyksos era c. 1700-1550, and I find this connection to have historical support from some of the more ancient historians including Josephus, who quotes Manetho. The Hyksos controlled Lower Egypt and moved its residence from Memphis to it's final capital Avaris where they ruled for a century. It was the Southern Egyptian nationals who waged war on these Arameans, and eventually captured and expelled them.Apiru worked as laborers and slaves in Egypt especially after Thutmose III's conquest of Canaan in 1480's bc. and even later still in 1290's while Rameses the great built his city of Pi-Rameses.It's well known that by the late 19th-20th dynasty c.1200, Egypt was loosing control of Canaan, and by 1160 they had no share in Canaan.
It was during this time that Israel rose up as nation. Israel as a people were known to exist c. 1210 bc under Merenptah's short purge.There were probably many different escapes or attempted escapes from Egypt--whom later semitic Hebrews and slaves of 18th-20th dynasty egypt would recollect. But none has ever been as large or notable as the Hyksos expulsion of c.1550. The city of Avars held some 250,000 people and the population involved with this expulsion must have been enormous. I feel that such an event would be remembered by the descendents of these Hyksos, the Israelites and their neighbors.

The Habiru/'apiru were a social class, whereas Hebrew is a ethnic group.1. In Mesopotamia, they are in evidence through the periods of Ur III, 1 Babylon, and after; in the Nuzi texts (fifteenth century) they play an especially prominent role.

​

2. Documents from Mari (eighteenth century) and Alalakh (seventeenth and fifteenth centuries) attest their presence in Upper Mesopotamia throughout the patriarchal age.

​

3. In Anatolia, the Cappadocian texts (nineteenth century) knew them, as did those of Boghazkoy (fourteenth century).

​

4. They are also mentioned in the Ras Shamra texts (fourteenth century).

​

5. Egyptian documents of the Empire period (fifteenth to twelfth century) refer to them, both as foes and rebels in Asia and as bondsmen in Egypt.

​

6. The Amarna letters (fourteenth century), where they appear in Palestine and adjoining areas as disturbers of the peace, are the best witness to them of all. (Bright: History of Israel, SCM Press, London 1972, p92) What's your evidence for this? This isn't undisputed though, we do not know for certain if this is the same Israel that is mentioned in the Bible.Brian.Edited by AdminJar, : fix unbalanced code

they where semtic in origin maybe even a branch of the caanites, but the evidence for the hyksos having anything to do with the hebrews is shakey. also josephus seems to have qouted Manetho wrong, hyksos means foreign rulers, they used it for everyone outside of egypt. historicly they have no clue who the hyksos are other than they were semitic in origin with many related names apiru meant others really theres no evidence it means anything but that i have read they have been called israelites before there was such a place as israel sorry was there another group people called hebrew who were not semitic?
the evidence is on you for proof of this, being that the hyksos were hunted down and destroyed i doubt they would remember thiswiki says: i guess they even turned it into a generic word for people outside of egypt too?
the thing is wouldn't someone write about a huge expulsion like that?, if you have 250k people moving i would think they wouldHyksos - Wikipedia

They were called Israelites because they are the descendants of Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel after a wrestling match with God (or angel) at the river Jabbok.All of Jacobs descendants went into Egypt and grew into what became the main body of the Exodus group.Brian.

quote:"The Habiru/'apiru were a social class, whereas Hebrew is a ethnic group."It's true that Hebrew is an ethnic tongue today.I feel the Hebrew/Habiru were originally just a social class within the Israelites and their neighbors east and west. The name later evolved to include an ethnic group synonymous with Israel c. 700-500 bc. Furthermore Israel itself constituted a diverse populous whose origins were Canaanitic, Amoritic, Egyptian, and Hurrian among others.The fact that the bible traditions mention the Hebrews making mud-bricks in the nile delta, and building the cities of Pithum and Raamses, seems to atleast have some plausible connection to the well known records of Apiru laborers in Pi-Rameses and other chief cities c. 18th-19th dynasty.Furthermore, in genesis 14:13, it mentions "Abram the Hebrew", and we later learn that this Abram is a wandering chieftan with 318 warriors, waging war on various Mesopotamian princes. This description of Abram is temptingly accurate in it's parallels to the vagrant Khabiru/Sa.Gaz of the same time period, and even the menacing Apiru of the later Amarna era fit this picture splendidly.quote:"What's your evidence for this?"1200-1100 bc. at this time-period well known settlements in the Judaean hills and proposed Reubenite settlement of Trans-Jordan can be attributed to the people called israel--and indeed the Merenptah Stele seems to pinpoint Israel in the Shephela aswell.quote:"This isn't undisputed though, we do not know for certain if this is the same Israel that is mentioned in the Bible."Well, I'd rather put my bet on it than believe there were 2 Israels. But you're right, a bit of faith has to be put into the Merenptah account that this was the same Israel of the bible.

And your evidence that there is a time that it wasn;t an ethnic 'tongue', is?I wasn't talking about a 'tongue' I was talking about a people. Your evidence for this is?It is okay having a 'feeling' but what is this 'feeling' based on?You know there is no linguistic similiartiy between the names? Are you serious?Can you try and support this unbelievable assertion? Really?Any chance of some supporting evidence? What are these 'records' of Apiru labourers at Pi-Rameses and Pithom, as well as other cities? So what time period would you place Abram in and what evidence do have to support this? Well, they actually don't. If you bother to read the Amrana letters you will see that they do not support an external invasion at all. (Bimson. J, Redating the Exodus and Conquest, Almond Press [b]Sheffield[/i] 1973, page 244) Why can they be attributed to the peoiple called Israel? What archaeological evidence is there for this assertion?BTW, I could have a good guess at where you get this information from, so probably it is best to provide your source, and keep within the forum guidelines. Why?You do not that there other references to an 'Israel' in ANE texts that are not attributed to our Israel? So from now on you are going to resist the absolute reference to the Israel in the MS as being the biblical people?Are you also aware that the Merneptah Stele obliterates the Bible chronology of the Exodus if the Israel in it is one and the same?There is a great deal of unsupported claims in your post, can I point out forum rule number 4:Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. There isn't a single claim in your post that satisfies this ruel.Brian.Edited by Brian, : No reason given.

...i'm not sure. people keep changing the spelling of "hapiru." if there's no "h" on the begining, and that "p" sound is really a "b" sound, and depending on the first vowel, it looks like it might be a cognate for 'ibrit.what's the original spelling? sure there are. just not from that time (that i know of?). we're reasonably certain that israel was a real kingdom at some point. Edited by arachnophilia, : misspelled "spelling." classic.

---

They haven't changed it at all since 1939 Is there really justification for the 'H' sound anymore?AFAIK 'Sa.Gaz' is translated in to Akkadian and Hittite as 'habbatu' (Wieppert, M The settlement of the Israelite Tribes in Palestine: a critical survey of the recent scholarly debate,SCM Press, London 1971,p.64) But since 1939 the consonantal element of the word 'ha-bi-ru' is now recognised as '-p-r, which meant all etymologies dependant on the root HBR were redundant. ( Gottwald, N Tribes of Yahweh: a sociology of the religion of liberated israel, 1250-1050 BCESCM Press, London 1979, page 401) Well this isn't a possibility as far as I am aware, have a link or something to support? You need to support the possibility of the 'b; in 'ibrit. How is anyone supposed to know that?Brian.