Numbers chapter three contains an inconsistency in the count of Levites. Numbers 3:22 records 7500 from Gershon, verse 28 records 8600 from Kohath, and verse 34 records 6200 from Merari. This totals 22,300, yet verse 39 gives the total as 22,000. Where is the error? It is clear from Numbers 3:43,46-47,50 that 22,273 firstborn were 273 more than the total number of Levite males (over one month of age); so the 22,000 figure must be correct. So what could have caused a slip in one of the first three figures? Consider alphabetic numerics. It is more familiar to most people in the Greek New Testament than in the Hebrew writings. (The Greek was derived from the Canaanite alphabet, which exactly parallels the Hebrew. Thus the Greek alphabet parallels the Hebrew except that it omits the letter tzaddi, the Hebrew letter for 90). The scheme goes like this for Greek and Hebrew:

α = A = 1 = א
β = B = 2 = ב
γ = Γ = 3 = ג
δ = Δ = 4 = ד
ε = E = 5 = ה
ϝ = F = 6 = ו
ζ = Z = 7 = ז
η = H = 8 = ח
θ = Θ = 9 = ט
ι = I = 10 = י
κ = K = 20 = כ
λ = Λ = 30 = ל
μ = M = 40 = מ
ν = N = 50 = נ
ξ = Ξ = 60 = ס
ο = O = 70 = ע
π = Π = 80 = פ
ψ = Ψ = 90 = צ
ρ = P = 100 = ק
σ = X = 200 = ר
τ = T = 300 = ש
υ = Y = 400 = ת
φ = Φ = 500
χ = Χ = 600
ψ = Ψ = 700
ω = Ω = 800
€ = € = 900

Later when vau or digamma, koppa and sampi, the Greek letters for 6, 90 and 900 respectively, were dropped from the Greek alphabet, these orphan letters continued to be used, or substitutes for them, such as the terminal sigma, s (stau), for vau. To indicate that it is a number, a line would be drawn over it; to indicate that it was thousands, a line would be drawn under it. For examples from the third century Chester Beatty III papyrus (P47),

Revelation 13:18 ΧΞΧ, for 600+60+6 = 666

Revelation 14:1 ΡΜΔ χειλιαδεσ, for 100+40+4 thousand = 144,000 (alternatively, ΡΜΔ)

Revelation 12:6 ΑΧΕ, for 1,000+200+60 = 1,260 (manuscript only partially legible here)

(In the 4th century uncial manuscripts, the numbers began to be written out full, such as ‘six hundred sixty six;’ rather than ‘666.’ It is thought that, because even the rare miscopying that happened with alphabetic numerics was unacceptable in the Word of God, the change was made to writing out numbers in full. The later minuscule manuscripts, beginning about the 9th to 10th centuries, again began to use alphabetic numerics.)

It is not unreasonable to suppose that the early Hebrew manuscripts also used alphabetic numerics (particularly as Millar Burrows told J. B. Parkinson he had seen the Hebrew ‘nun’ [the letter representing 50] so used one place in the Dead Sea Scrolls). Consider that part of Numbers 3:28 which in the Masoretic reads:

(Note that Hebrew is to be read from right to left, which was the natural way for a right-handed person to chisel block letters into stone.) If this same line had been written in alphabetic numerics it would have been as appears below left, or for 8300, as below right:

In the manuscripts, there is little or no space between words (as may be seen in James A. Sanders, ‘The Psalms Scroll of Qumran Cave 11;’ Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan IV; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965); so this line would appear as: ‘. A scribe writing out the numbers could then very easily have mistaken 8300 for 8600 by seeing the two adjacent . This would seem to be the simplest explanation for the apparently discrepant numbers.

– James Parkinson

Download PDF