Sociology 101: counting and calculating

I've talked before about my penchant for sociology or cultural anthropology.

As I've been reading through 1 and 2 Kings, I was struck by another cultural difference: How the ancient Hebrews counted--or expressed numbers--compared to how we would express them in our culture today.

See if this strikes you.

Let's start with the observation that Jeroboam and Rehoboam began to reign in their respective kingdoms at the same time: Jeroboam over the Kingdom of Israel; Rehoboam over the Kingdom of Judah.

1 Kings 14:21 and 31: "Rehoboam . . . reigned for seventeen years. . . . And Rehoboam slept with his fathers. . . ."

1 Kings 15:1 and 2: "Now in the eighteenth year of King Jeroboam, . . . Abijam began to reign over Judah. He reigned for three years. . . ."

1 Kings 15:9 and 10: "In the twentieth year of Jeroboam king of Israel, Asa began to reign over Judah, and he reigned forty-one years. . . ."

1 Kings 15:25: "Nadab the son of Jeroboam began to reign over Israel in the second year of Asa king of Judah, and he reigned over Israel two years."

1 Kings 15:27 and 28: "Baasha the son of Ahijah . . . conspired against [Nadab]. And Baasha struck him down. . . . So Baasha killed him in the third year of Asa king of Judah. . . ."

--I could continue the series. (I have done so in my own reading.) The pattern remains consistent. Have you caught what is going on?

• Abijam comes to power in the 18th year of Jeroboam.
   
• Abijam reigns for 3 years and Asa, his successor, comes to power in the 20th year of Jeroboam and will reign for 41 years.
   
• Nadab comes to power in the 2nd year of Asa's reign.
   
• Nadab reigns for 2 years before he is killed in the 3rd year of Asa's reign. . . .

Catch that?

• A three-year reign takes place when a king comes to power in the 18th year of another king's reign and dies in the 20th year of that other king's reign.
   
• And a two-year reign occurs when a king comes to power in the 2nd year of another king's reign and dies in the 3rd year of that other king's reign.

Normally, the way I look at things, if someone reigns from the middle of the eighteenth to the middle of the twentieth year, I would say he reigned for two years. Similarly, if someone reigns from the middle of the second year to the middle of the third year, I would say he reigned for one year.

But, according to how the writer of 1 Kings records it, I would be wrong. The correct answers are three years and two years, respectively.

Best I can make out: If you reign in the 18th year, then you have reigned for one year. If you reign in the 19th year, then you have reigned for a second year. And if you reign in the 20th year, then you have reigned for a third year: three years, total.

Similarly, if you reign in the 2nd year, then you have reigned for one year. And if you reign in the 3rd year, then you have reigned for a second year: two years, total.

And so forth.

Check it out!

The pattern continues at 1 Kings 15:33; 16:8, 10, 15, 23, 29; 22:41-42, 51; 2 Kings 3:1; 8:16-17 . . . --And that's as far as I've gotten.

Sandalwood

I was reading 1 Kings 9 and 10 this morning. These include some interesting geographic, botanical and zoological references.

I wondered where Ezion-geber "near Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom" was.

Not hard to find.

Best I can tell, it's about where modern Eilat [Elat], Israel, is, at the northern tip of the eastern "rabbit ear" extension of the Red Sea--the portion of the Red Sea that is known today as the Gulf of Aqaba.

But then I wondered where Ophir is (or was):

King Solomon built a fleet of ships at Ezion-geber. . . . And Hiram [of Tyre; cf. 7:13 (and 5:1?)] sent with the fleet his servants, seamen who were familiar with the sea, together with the servants of Solomon. And they went to Ophir and brought from there gold, 420 talents, and they brought it to King Solomon.

--Oh. Before we get to Ophir, let's do the math on the gold.

A "talent", a footnote in my Bible says, was "about 75 pounds."

So 420 talents was over 15 tons--which, according to an article titled How Much Gold is there in the World?, is very nearly one ten-thousandth of the total of all gold ever mined in all of world history to the present . . . and not quite enough gold to fill a cube that is one yard per side.

As for value: 420 talents of gold x 75 lbs/talent x 16 ozs/lb x ~$1,000/oz = ~$504 million in gold in today's money.

Not shabby.

Okay. On to Ophir.

Wikipedia suggests a number of specific locations--from "the African shore of the Red Sea, with the name perhaps being derived from the Afar people of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Djibouti," to "Abhira, at the mouth of the Indus River in modern-day Pakistan," to really wild locations--like the equivalent of modern-day Philippines, Australia, Brazil or Peru!

"Most modern scholars . . . place Ophir either on the coast of either Pakistan or India, in what is now Poovar, or somewhere in southwest Arabia in the region of modern Yemen."

Here's a map that could give you some general sense of place and distance.


View Larger Map

For a few additional clues: The Abhira Kingdom is visible in this large map available from Wikimedia. Interesting: If, indeed, Ophir was ancient Abhira; and if it was located on the Sarasvati River, then Ophir was in the midst of what is now called the Indus Valley Civilization, also known as the Harappan Civilization--in the border region between modern Pakistan and India. One problem with thinking Ophir was in the midst of the Harappan Civilization: modern scholars date that civilization from approximately 3000 BC to approximately 1300 BC--which, if the dates are accurate, also makes it some 300 years or more too early for King Solomon. . . . or, possibly, quite a ways further south in what is now known as Poovar, Kerala State, India (west coast of the far southern portion of India). "Poovar was a trading center of timber, sandalwood, ivory and spices," says the Wikipedia article on Poovar.

Having done all the work I've just shown you, it suddenly struck me that I ought to look at a decent biblical commentary to see what it might have to say about Ophir. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, I thought, provide perhaps the most satisfying answer: "Ophir," they say, was "a general name, like the East or West Indies with us, for all the southern regions lying on the African, Arabian, or Indian seas, in so far as at that time known."

Okay.

There was one last item I wanted to know about. 1 Kings 10:11 and 12 says,

[T]he fleet of Hiram, which brought gold from Ophir, brought from Ophir a very great amount of almug wood and precious stones. And the king made of the almug wood supports for the house of [YHWH] and for the king's house, also lyres and harps for the singers.

I wondered: "What is almug wood? How can it be good both for structural support and for musical instruments?"

Well . . . It appears that "almug wood" is also known as algum wood . . . or sandalwood!

Whoa!

I love sandalwood! So fragrant!

And having just been reading about how Solomon used cedar and cypress wood throughout the temple, and then (now) added sandalwood . . . ! Whoa! What a pleasure that would have been to enter the fragrance of that place!

******
One last item. About sandalwood.

Neat story about how some college freshmen may have just discovered a way to reduce the cost of sandalwood oil in the future: Of Dollars and Scents.

Bible math

As I committed myself last year, so I've committed myself this year: I want to read through the Bible in one year.

And on Monday I came across some numbers that simply "don't make sense" to me. I'm wondering how anyone else might reasonably interpret them.

In the Book of Numbers, chapters 1 and 2, if I'm reading the text correctly, we get an enumeration of all males "from twenty years old and upward, all who were able to go to war" (1:20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 45-46; also 2:4, 6, 8, 11, 13, 15, 19, 21, 23, 26, 28, 30 and 32). --I actually took the time to align all the specific numbers mentioned in chapter 2 to the numbers mentioned in chapter 1; and I checked the math to see if all the numbers added up. (They did.)

As I read this unbelievably repetitive portion of text, I kept wondering:

Why does the author keep repeating himself? Why not simply say something along the lines of, "The number of men from twenty years old and upward able to go to war, numbered by clan, by their fathers' houses, were as follows: From the the tribe of Reuben, 46,500; from the tribe of Simeon, 59,300; from the tribe of . . . "? Why, instead, this lengthy repetition of verbiage:

The people of Reuben, Israel's firstborn, their generations, by their clans, by their fathers' houses, according to the number of names, head by head, every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were able to go to war: those listed of the tribe of Reuben were 46,500.

Of the people of Simeon, their generations, by their clans, by their fathers' houses, those of them who were listed, according to the number of names, head by head, every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were able to go to war: those listed of the tribe of Simeon were 59,300. . . .

And so on and so forth.

Unbelievable repetition!

But I slogged through. And the ultimate summary of both chapters--chapter 1 and chapter 2--is that there were 603,550 men 20 years old and upward who could be expected to go to war in behalf of Israel at that particular point in history.

"But the Levites [i.e., the tribe of Levi--the priestly tribe] were not listed among the people of Israel" (2:33).

Okay.

So then I came to chapter 3. And in chapter 3 we have the census of the Levites. And I checked the numbers there, too, and I agreed with the author that, according to what he had written in 3:21ff, if those verses are accurate, then "All those listed among the Levites, . . . all the males from a month old and upward, were 22,000" (Numbers 3:39).

Good.

But then I ran into a problem.

And [YHWH] said to Moses, "List all the firstborn males of the people of Israel, from a month old and upward, taking the number of their names. And you shall take the Levites for me--I am [YHWH] --instead of all the firstborn among the people of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the cattle of the people of Israel." So Moses listed all the firstborn among the people of Israel, as [YHWH] commanded him. And all the firstborn males, according to the number of names, from a month old and upward as listed were 22,273.

And [YHWH] spoke to Moses, saying, "Take the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the people of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of their cattle. The Levites shall be mine: I am [YHWH]. And as the redemption price for the 273 of the firstborn of the people of Israel, over and above the number of the male Levites, you shall take five shekels per head; you shall take them according to the shekel of the sanctuary (the shekel of twenty gerahs and give the money to Aaron and his sons as the redemption price for those who are over."

--Numbers 3:40-48

"What's the problem, John?"

The problem is the number of firstborn!

You've got 22,273 firstborn males a month old and upward among a male population of 20 years old and upward of 603,550! If the 603,550 included all males a month old and older, the math would be slightly better. Indeed, assuming the kinds of population numbers we see in various parts of the world, where the average age is, say, 15, then the statistics would be somewhat better.

But let's take the Bible at its word. There were 603,550 men aged 20 and up, and there were 22,273 firstborn males a month old and older.

That means that, among a minimum of 603,550 men, there were a maximum of 22,273 firstborn males.

603,550/22,273 = 27.1

!!!!

Do you begin to "feel" the problem I felt?

If these numbers are to be believed, and if I have interpreted the Bible correctly, then, at best, only one in 27 men was a firstborn. On average, each father had to have had 27 sons. Add in the daughters (who weren't counted), and you'd have parents averaging somewhere above 50 children per couple.

--Anyone want to suggest some solutions to this conundrum?