Translation commentary on Numbers 1:1

The LORD renders the Hebrew personal name for God, which is YHWH. Like the Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, many other English translations render this name as “LORD,” printed in upper case letters. But they use “Lord” when the Hebrew has ʾadonai, which means “Lord” or “Master.” Already before the Christian era, the Jews avoided pronouncing the proper name of God, YHWH (a positive taboo). Instead, they would pronounce the Hebrew title ʾadonai.

If necessary, in some languages it is legitimate to add a possessive pronoun to LORD, for example, “my LORD” or “their LORD” (depending on the context), although this was never done with the personal name of God in Hebrew. This may be obligatory especially in languages that have an inclusive/exclusive reference system. Otherwise it would appear that the person speaking did not consider God to be his or her own God.

Some translations simply transcribe the Hebrew name YHWH as “Yahweh” (for example, New Jerusalem Bible and La Bible de Jérusalem: Nouvelle édition revue et corrigée, since it is a proper noun. However, the pronunciation of this name in ancient times is uncertain, so it is not clear what vowels should be used to spell the name in languages today.

Other translations make an effort to render the supposed meaning of this name; for example, Nouvelle version Segond révisée has “The Eternal [One].” (The Hebrew name is an early form of the verb hayah [“to be”] in the third person singular.) Such renderings replace a personal name by an impersonal abstraction, and this may give a wrong impression in the target language.

In some cultures there may be a familiar personal, tribal or national name for the supreme Deity that is distinct from the generic term for “god” but quite similar in usage to YHWH (for example, Chauta in Chewa, a major Bantu language of south-central Africa). In such cases it may be wise to adopt this name as the equivalent for YHWH and give a full explanation of the biblical name in the glossary or in the introduction to the Old Testament (or Genesis).

The LORD spoke to Moses: This expression, or something very similar, is repeated again and again in Numbers to underscore the divine origin of all the commands and directions that Moses gave to the people of Israel. This repetition should be retained in a translation if possible, but in some cases, depending on the nature of the translation, this phrase may have to be condensed or even omitted for stylistic reasons. Good News Translation moves this expression to the middle of the sentence for a more natural reading. Other languages may prefer a different position also.

In the wilderness of Sinai: The Hebrew word for wilderness (midbar) refers to a dry and barren, uncultivated region where there may be some vegetation. Its main component of meaning is that it is a desolate area where no humans settle. (Nomads with flocks can inhabit the region, as Moses did when he first fled from Egypt [see Exo 2.15-17].) The target language term chosen should not suggest a desert of sand with dunes and little else. Sinai is the name of a vast region in today’s Sinai Peninsula to the northeast of Egypt and south of Palestine (Canaan). It is not just a mountain, so Good News Translation says “the Sinai Desert.” If the word “Desert” is misleading, translators may say “the Sinai Wilderness.”

In the tent of meeting: Even at the beginning of this book, the tent of meeting is already considered known to the reader. It is the portable sanctuary of the people of Israel, described in Exo 25–30, in which God met with Moses to communicate to his will (see Exo 33.7-11) and revealed himself to his people. Good News Translation calls this sanctuary “the Tent of his [the LORD’s] presence,” which highlights these facts and may provide a better model for most languages. Alternative renderings are “the tent where the LORD is,” “the tent where the LORD appears,” and “the holy tent.” Translators should be consistent in their rendering of this expression. There may be an equivalent in the target language that stems from ancient ancestral religious practices. But such a term should be used only if it has already been widely accepted among the churches. The word tent may be difficult to translate in some languages. It may be rendered “temporary [or, portable] shelter” or “house made of skins.” The tent of meeting is also called “the tabernacle of the testimony” in 1.50 (see the comments there). It would be helpful to distinguish these two expressions, which Good News Translation does not do.

On the first day of the second month, in the second year after they had come out of the land of Egypt: God spoke to Moses approximately thirteen months after the Israelites had left Egypt, that is, after the Exodus, a major temporal point of reference in the history of Israel, equivalent to the B.C./A.D. distinction in classical Christian chronology. This speech took place one month after the completion of the Tent of Meeting (see Exo 40.17). The second month in the Hebrew calendar is Ziv, which corresponds to mid-April to mid-May. The Hebrew word for month (chodesh) is literally “new moon.” It refers to a lunar month, which includes roughly 29.5 days. Some languages may have a distinct term for this, or even a traditional term for the lunar month that now refers to the modern calendrical month, for example, Chewa has mwezi (literally “moon”). Good News Translation makes it explicit that the pronoun they refers to “the people of Israel.”

Good News Translation has reversed the order of the phrases in this verse, and as a result, it is not clear that the adverb “there” refers to “the Sinai Desert.” Rather than reversing the order of the phrases, translators should first consider rendering them in their existing order but in separate sentences. This will ensure that not too much new information is packed into a single sentence, though languages differ in how much is natural or normal in this respect. A model that uses several sentences for this verse is:

• The LORD spoke to Moses in the Tent of his presence in the Sinai Wilderness. This was on the first day of the second month in the second year after the Israelites had left Egypt. He said….

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Numbers 1:2 - 1:3

Take a census of all the congregation of the people of Israel …: The Hebrew imperative verb rendered Take is plural. God is not telling only Moses to number the Israelites. This is clear from verse 3, where he says you and Aaron shall number them, so Good News Translation begins verse 2 with “You and Aaron are to take a census….” According to 1.17, it is indeed Moses and Aaron who carry out the instructions that are given here. So in languages that lack a plural imperative form or in which a plural imperative on its own would be awkward or overly ambiguous, Good News Translation is a good model to follow. The English word census refers to the “value, total amount, sum” of items to be counted. The Hebrew expression for Take a census is literally “Lift up the head.” Some languages say “Count the heads.” Chewa has “Count up.” The Hebrew word for congregation (ʿedah) is better rendered “community” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Good News Translation omits ʿedah, perhaps because it considered this term repetitive in combination with the word for people in the same sentence. However, this is not a good solution, if it can be avoided. The word ʿedah refers to the entire national, legal and cultic society of Israel. The people that are numbered in the census are not only a potential army but a worshiping community, people who are organized around the LORD’s Tent of Meeting (so Sherwood, page 141). The word used for “congregation/church” in the New Testament may not be satisfactory here, since it would normally refer to a much smaller group. In Chewa the vernacular word for “congregation” would also suggest wrongly in this context that a meeting for worship is taking place.

By families, by fathers’ houses: The Hebrew expressions for families and fathers’ houses (literally “house of their fathers”) are not synonymous. Families renders the Hebrew word mishpachah. This word refers to a clan, which is composed of several houses or families. Good News Translation says “by clans and families,” which brings out this difference in size between “clan” and “house” more clearly, beginning with the larger unit (compare Josh 7.14). (Even in cultures where the term “clan” is sometimes used in the context of feuds between families or factions in society, probably the nature of the subject of this chapter with reference to Israel will still allow for the term “clan” to be used without causing confusion over this.) The Hebrew word for “house” in this context refers to an extended family, which includes three or four generations. If translators can keep houses or a similar metaphorical term, then fathers’ can be understood as “ancestral” (compare New Revised Standard Version [New Revised Standard Version] with “in their clans, by ancestral houses”). The Israelite kinship system was clearly based on patriarchal lines of descent, not matriarchal. Many languages do not have separate words for families, clans, and tribes. Thus “clans” may have to be expressed as “family groups,” and “tribes” (see verse 4) as “large groups of families.”

According to the number of names, every male, head by head: The point of the phrase head by head is that no man should be left out (compare New International Version “one by one”).

From twenty years old and upward, all in Israel who are able to go forth to war: These two phrases are not to be read separately but form one requirement; once a young man was twenty he was considered mature enough to take part in military activities. This point should be clear in the translation.

You and Aaron shall number them: Number renders the Hebrew verb paqad (literally “visit”). This verb is better translated “enroll” (New Revised Standard Version), “record” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), or “muster.”

Company by company is literally “by their troops.” The Hebrew term here, which Good News Translation omits, shows that the census was primarily a military one. Only the men fit for military service were counted. The Israelites were arranged into a well-organized army in preparation for their march to take possession of the land of Canaan.

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Numbers 1:4

And there shall be with you a man from each tribe: The Hebrew pronoun for you is plural, referring to Moses and Aaron. Israel consisted of twelve tribes. A tribe (matteh in Hebrew) was the largest social unit in the nation. It was composed of several clans, which, in turn, were composed of several families (see the comments on verses 2-3). The renderings in a translation may not exactly correspond in size with these terms, but they should at least reflect these increasingly smaller units of organization; they should also fit in a verse like Josh 7.14, where tribes, clans and families are distinguished from each other. Having a representative from each tribe involved in making the census would help to ensure its fairness, hence also its credibility and legitimacy.

Each man being the head of the house of his fathers: Each tribal representative had to be the head of a family before he was selected to help Moses and Aaron. Good News Translation says “clan chief,” but it is more accurate to say “family chief” in light of the framework of kinship terms noted above.

Verses 4 and 16 provide a frame around the actual listing of the leaders’ names in verses 5-15.

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Numbers 1:5 - 1:16

A major issue here is where God’s direct speech ends. (This is crucial particularly in languages in which direct speech is not simply ended with closing quotation marks but with the verb of speaking.) The grammatical structure of verse 5 in Hebrew, including its use of the second person plural pronoun in verse 5 (you), clearly indicates that God’s direct speech continues at least until the end of verse 15 (so Revised Standard Version) or even to the end of verse 16 (so New Living Translation [New Living Translation]). So God does not only give the general instructions in verses 2-4; he also specifically instructs who are to be selected to assist Moses and Aaron in verses 5-15. So Revised Standard Version is more in line with the Hebrew text here than Good News Translation in which God’s direct speech already ends after verse 4. The unfortunate result in Good News Translation is that verses 5-16 have become narrative text. Even more seriously, in Good News Translation the specific selection of tribal leaders now appears to have been only a decision matter for the community itself and not for God! As part of its restructuring, Good News Translation has put the concluding summary found in verse 16 before verse 5. We do not recommend handling these verses in this way.

And these are the names of the men who shall attend you introduces the actual list of tribal leaders in verses 5b-15. Who shall attend you is literally “who will stand with you,” which means they will assist Moses and Aaron.

From Reuben, Elizur the son of Shedeur: Elizur is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Reuben. Reuben was the first son of Jacob and Leah (see Gen 29.32; 35.23). Elizur is mentioned again in 2.10; 7.30, 35; and 10.18.

From Simeon, Shelumi-el the son of Zurishaddai: Shelumi-el is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Simeon. Simeon was the second son of Jacob and Leah (see Gen; 29.33; 35.23). Shelumi-el is mentioned again in 2.12; 7.36, 41; and 10.19. There is no need for the hyphen in this name in a translation.

From Judah, Nahshon the son of Amminadab: Nahshon is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Judah. Judah was the fourth son of Jacob and Leah (see Gen 29.35; 35.23). Nahshon is mentioned again in 2.3; 7.12, 17; and 10.14 (see also Ruth 4.20; 2 Chr 2.10-11; Matt 1.4; Luke 3.32).

From Issachar, Nethanel the son of Zuar: Nethanel is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Issachar. Issachar was the fifth son of Jacob and Leah (see Gen 30.18; 35.23). Nethanel is mentioned again in 2.5; 7.18, 23; and 10.15.

From Zebulun, Eliab the son of Helon: Eliab is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Zebulun. Zebulun was the sixth son of Jacob and Leah (see Gen 30.19-20; 35.23). Eliab is mentioned again in 2.7; 7.24, 29; and 10.16.

From the sons of Joseph, from Ephraim, Elishama the son of Ammihud, and from Manasseh, Gamaliel the son of Pedahzur: The two tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are almost put together. The simple list of Good News Translation has wrongly omitted this important connection between Ephraim and Manasseh. Joseph was the older son of Jacob and Rachel (see Gen 30.22-24; 35.24). Ephraim and Manasseh were Joseph’s sons (see Gen 41.50-52). These two sons of Joseph are included according to God’s promise (see Gen 49.22-26; Deut 33.13-17). The traditional number of twelve tribes is retained in this way, in view of the exclusion of the tribe of Levi from the census. Elishama is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Ephraim. He is mentioned again in 2.18; 7.48, 53; and 10.22 (see also 1 Chr 7.26). Gamaliel is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Manasseh. He is mentioned again in 2.20; 7.54, 59; and 10.23.

From Benjamin, Abidan the son of Gideoni: Abidan is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Benjamin. Benjamin was the younger son of Jacob and Rachel (see Gen 35.16-18, 24). Abidan is mentioned again in 2.22; 7.60, 65; and 10.24.

From Dan, Ahi-ezer the son of Ammishaddai: Ahi-ezer is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Dan. Dan was the older son of Jacob and Bilhah, Rachel’s servant (see Gen 30.3-6; 35.25). Ahi-ezer is mentioned again in 2.25; 7.66, 71; and 10.25.

From Asher, Pagiel the son of Ochran: Pagiel is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Asher. Asher was the younger son of Jacob and Zilpah, Leah’s servant (see Gen 30.12-13; 35.26). Pagiel is mentioned again in 2.27; 7.72, 77; and 10.26.

From Gad, Eliasaph the son of Deuel: Eliasaph is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Gad. Gad was the older son of Jacob and Zilpah (see Gen 30.9-11; 35.26). Eliasaph is mentioned again in 2.14; 7.42, 47; and 10.20. The name Deuel is spelled “Reuel” in 2.14 (see the comments there).

From Naphtali, Ahira the son of Enan: Ahira is chosen as the leader from the tribe of Naphtali. Naphtali was the younger son of Jacob and Bilhah (see Gen 30.7-8; 35.25). Ahira is mentioned again in 2.29; 7.78, 83; and 10.27.

It is evident in the above comments that the names of these leaders are found also in chapters 2, 7 and 10, so translators will need to make a note of that fact and render them consistently.

These were the ones chosen from the congregation …: The Hebrew has no past tense verb here, so other possible renderings are “These are the ones chosen…” (similarly New Living Translation) and “These are the ones called…” (Buber, Luther; similarly New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Russian Synodal Orthodox Version). If present tense is used here, it is possible to include even verse 16 in God’s direct speech (so New Living Translation, Bijbel in Gewone Taal, De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling). But a disadvantage of including verse 16 in the direct speech is that it makes God say things to Moses and Aaron which presumably they know already. So verse 16 is better understood as a concluding statement by the author/editor of this part of the book (as suggested also by the Hebrew syntactic structure, in which the sentence begins with the demonstrative pronoun meaning “these” and ends with a seemingly redundant pronoun meaning “they”).

Who chose these leaders? The Hebrew form rendered the ones chosen does not express this and, if possible, the agent should be left implied. But this may not be possible in the translation. If so, translators may express God as the one who chose them, or Moses and Aaron, who carried out God’s instructions. Bijbel in Gewone Taal, which makes verse 16 part of God’s direct speech, begins this verse with “It is they whom I have chosen….” But since verse 16 is not part of God’s direct speech, a better model is “These are the ones whom God [or, Moses and Aaron] chose….”

For the Hebrew word rendered congregation (ʿedah), see the comments on verse 2. Translators should render it in the same way here.

The leaders of their ancestral tribes: The Hebrew word for leaders is nasiʾ. This word refers to a prominent and distinguished leader, for example, a much respected sheikh of a tribe; thus leaders (so also Good News Translation) seems a rather flat translation. A better rendering in English is “chiefs” (Revised English Bible) or “chieftains” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). In verse 4 these men are referred to as heads of their ancestral houses, but here they are even referred to as chiefs of their ancestral tribes. The difference may be due to the selection of these men for their special representative task. In any case, the difference in terminology should be maintained in translation.

The heads of the clans of Israel is literally “heads of thousands of Israel.” This Hebrew word for “thousands” is not a kinship term, but refers here to divisions in a tribe, more specifically, to military units.

Although Revised Standard Version translates the leaders and the heads, there is nothing in the Hebrew construction here that necessarily corresponds with these two occurrences of the definite article the. So a more accurate translation of verse 16 is “These are the ones chosen from the community, chiefs of their ancestral tribes, heads of divisions in Israel.” It is not certain that these men were the only chiefs and heads of this kind in Israel’s military organization.

In verse 4 Revised Standard Version makes it explicit that these men were already family heads before they were chosen to help Moses and Aaron. So verse 16 does not imply that they were selected to become family chiefs at this point. They were selected to be heads of divisions. Good News Translation makes this clear by beginning verses 5-16 with “These are the men, [already] leaders within their tribes, who were chosen from the community for this work.”

Possible models for verse 16 are:

• These men, chiefs of their ancestral tribes, are the ones chosen from the community; they are heads of divisions in Israel.

• These men, chiefs of their ancestral tribes, are [were] the ones chosen from the community to be heads of divisions in Israel.

Even though translators are encouraged to close God’s direct speech at the end of verse 15, Good News Translation‘s list layout for verses 5b-15 is still recommended as fitting the context of a census. Translations that keep the list layout, but close the direct speech as the end of verse 15, are New International Version, the Contemporary English Version, and the NET Bible. In these translations verse 16 is no longer direct speech and so it is formatted differently from the list.

“Clan chief” is one of the headings in the list layout of Good News Translation. As explained in the comments on verse 4, “Family chief” would be more accurate than “Clan chief.” The list layout in the French common language version (Bible en français courant) is without headings, but every line in the list in Bible en français courant begins with “the tribe of…” to serve as a generic marker of the specific names that follow.

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Exodus. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Numbers 1:17 - 1:18

A new paragraph begins at verse 17. Moses and Aaron carry out God’s instructions given in the preceding verses. The time and setting given in verses 18 and 19 repeat the information of verse 1 in reverse order.

Moses and Aaron took these men who have been named: A literal translation of the verb took may suggest that Moses and Aaron carried these men off somewhere. If so, it will be more natural to use the verb “called.” These men who have been named refers back to the men listed in verses 5b-15. Good News Translation says simply “these twelve men.”

And on the first day of the second month: As in verse 1 (see the comments there), the first day of the second month is still in the second year since the Exodus from Egypt. The Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation, makes this explicit by saying “the first [day] of the month of the second year.”

They assembled the whole congregation together: It is not immediately clear who is the referent for the pronoun they. Did only Moses and Aaron assemble the congregation, or did the twelve tribal representatives do this, or all fourteen of them? In line with verses 4-5 the twelve representatives did not have more than an assisting role, so Good News Translation renders this clause and verse 17 as “With the help of these twelve men Moses and Aaron called together the whole community,” which is a good model. For congregation see verse 2.

Who registered themselves by families, by fathers’ houses, according to the number of names from twenty years old and upward, head by head: This rendering brings out much more accurately than Good News Translation the reflexive character of the Hebrew verb here; the verb’s subject is all the men twenty years old or older in the community. In some languages a passive verb will be more natural; for example, this clause may be rendered “and the names of all the men twenty years old or older were registered [or, recorded] by clans and families.” If a passive construction is not available either, then Good News Translation provides an acceptable model by having the same subject for “called together” and “registered.”

For by families, by fathers’ houses, see verse 2. The Hebrew here is better rendered “by clans and families.”

For from twenty years old and upward, see verse 3.

For head by head, see verse 2. Not a single man was left out, so Good News Translation says “all the men.” Another possible model is “each one of the men.”

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Numbers 1:19

This verse functions as a summary of for either verses 17-19 or, more likely, verses 2-19. The Leningrad Codex, on which the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia edition is based, has a minor break in the text between verses 19 and 20. This would suggest that verse 19 is not the introduction to verse 20.

As the LORD commanded Moses. So he numbered them in the wilderness of Sinai: In both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation the clause as the LORD commanded Moses is connected with what precedes. Although this is often the case with this clause in the Hebrew, such a connection seems unlikely here. By way of a summary, the text explicitly returns to Moses as the central figure and to the verb numbered. Traduction œcuménique de la Bible renders this verse as follows: “As the LORD had commanded him, Moses numbered them in the desert of Sinai.” Reversing the order of these clauses will bring out even more clearly that this verse is a summary; for example, La Nouvelle Bible Segond has “Moses numbered them in the desert of Sinai, as the LORD had commanded him.” In some languages an introductory conjunction or transitional expression may help to indicate a summary statement, for instance, “And so” or “In this way.”

Good News Translation renders commanded as “had commanded.” Although, unlike English, Hebrew has no separate verb form to express that something already took place earlier, that is, before a certain point in the past, here it is clear that the verb refers back to the LORD’s commands in verses 2-15. This distinction in time should be indicated in translation. Good News Translation leaves commanded without an object, but in the Hebrew Moses is mentioned directly after this verb.

Numbered renders the same Hebrew verb (paqad) translated “number” in verse 3 (see the comments there). It is better rendered “registered” (Good News Translation), “enrolled” (New Revised Standard Version), or “recorded” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

For the wilderness of Sinai, see verse 1.

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Numbers 1:20 - 1:46

The people of Reuben, Israel’s first-born: It should be made clear that Israel refers to Reuben’s father Jacob, who was renamed Israel, and not to the people of Israel. It is probably for this reason that Good News Translation has actually replaced Israel with “Jacob.” However, the Hebrew brings out that the people and their common ancestor share the same name. So a better way to avoid confusion between the ancestor and the people named after him is to keep the name Israel by beginning verse 20 with “The people of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel’s sons” or “The people of Reuben, the firstborn of the ancestor Israel.”

Various formulaic expressions recur throughout verses 20-43 and are the same for the census of every Israelite tribe. In translation these expressions should be rendered consistently in terms of wording and order of occurrence. If a language requires that the various expressions are put in a different order, this should be done consistently for every tribe as well. The recurring expressions are as follows:

1. Their generations refers to the descendants of a particular ancestor through an unspecified number of generations. So a rendering such as “their descendants” (Bijbel: Vertaling in opdracht van het Nederlandsch Bijbelgenootschap) or even “their successors” is more accurate and probably less puzzling than their generations. Compare also New Revised Standard Version with “their lineage.”
2. By their families, by their fathers’ houses: See verse 2. The Hebrew kinship terminology here is better rendered “according to clan and family” (Good News Translation) or “by clans and families.”
3. According to the number of names: See verse 2. In verse 22, which introduces the census of the tribe of Simeon, the following phrase precedes this one: those of them that were numbered. This phrase is absent elsewhere in verses 20-43. Good News Translation omits this phrase, but the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (Hebrew Old Testament Text) recommends keeping it. Were numbered renders the same Hebrew verb translated “number” in verse 3 (see the comments there).
4. Head by head: See verse 2.
5. Every male from twenty years old and upward: See verses 2-3.
6. Who were able to go forth to war means “who were fit for military service” (Good News Translation; see verse 3). Good News Translation moves this clause closer to the beginning of the sentence. This is helpful since it makes it clear from the start that only those fit for military service were included. Except for the beginning of verse 20, there is no past tense verb form in the Hebrew of verses 20-43. This clause is the same as in verse 3 and may not need a past tense in translation by saying “those able to go forth to war.” However, the Hebrew past tense form at the beginning of verse 20 makes it clear that the list of verses 20-43 as a whole does refer to the past. This past tense is expressed in NET Bible, which begins verse 20 with “And they were as follows: The descendants of Reuben….”
7. The number of the tribe of …: The Hebrew word for number renders the verb paqad translated “number” in verse 3 (see the comments there). New Revised Standard Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translate this phrase as “those enrolled of/from the tribe of….”

Of the people of Joseph, namely, of the people of Ephraim … Of the people of Manasseh…(verses 32-35): Ephraim and Manasseh were sons of Joseph, a son of Jacob (see verse 10). These two tribes are combined here under the name of their ancestor Joseph. Good News Translation has omitted this connection between Ephraim and Manasseh. But even in a list layout, this problem can be solved by inserting “Joseph’s sons” in the list (so New Afrikaans Version) or by listing “tribe of Ephraim, son of Joseph” and “tribe of Manasseh, son of Joseph” (so Bible en français courant).

Of the people of Naphtali (verse 42): Strictly speaking, the preposition corresponding to Of is lacking in the Hebrew text. The reason for this may be to mark the fact that the people of Naphtali are mentioned last in this list (so Rendsburg). Ancient translations have treated this phrase in the same way as with the other tribes.

These are those who were numbered, whom Moses and Aaron numbered with the help of the leaders of Israel, twelve men, each representing his fathers’ house (verse 44): The Hebrew verb rendered were numbered and numbered is paqad (see verse 3, where it is translated “number”). New Revised Standard Version is better with “were enrolled” and “enrolled.” For leaders (nasiʾ in Hebrew), see the comments on verse 16. The leaders of Israel, twelve men are the tribal representatives listed in verses 5b-15.

So the whole number of the people of Israel (verse 45) is literally “And they were all those enrolled of the people of Israel.” The connector So is not in the Hebrew, but such a conjunction is helpful to indicate that verses 45-46 are a conclusion for verses 17-44. Number renders the Hebrew verb paqad again (see verse 3), so it is better translated “enrolled” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

Their whole number was (verse 46) is literally “and all those who were enrolled were.” Once again, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translates the Hebrew term paqad for number more accurately by rendering this phrase as “all who were enrolled came to.”

Thousand: The surprisingly high numbers in verses 20-46 have been the subject of much discussion among scholars. There is one point that has sometimes been made which, if valid, would affect translation. The Hebrew word for thousand is ʾelef, which is the same word rendered clans in verse 16 (see the comments there). The word ʾelef is not necessarily a precise number and can also mean “division” or “contingent.” So if we read the numbers in this way (that is, ʾelef meaning “contingent”), then the number forty-six thousand five hundred for the tribe of Reuben in verse 21 should be rendered “46 contingents that together numbered 500 men.” With this interpretation of ʾelef, the tribes together would consist of 598 (that is, 46 + 59 + 45 + 74 + 54 + 57 + 40 + 32 + 35 + 62 + 41 + 53) contingents, and the total number of men would only be 5,550 (that is, 500 + 300 + 650 + 600 + 400 + 400 + 500 + 200 + 400 + 700 + 500 + 400). The number of men in one contingent would have to vary between 5 (in the tribe of Simeon) and 15 (in the tribe of Gad). According to this view, the thousands were only treated as part of the actual numbers at a later stage in the transmission of the Hebrew text. And only this led to the addition of the total number of 603,550 in verse 46. So this alternative meaning of ʾelef might explain what lies behind the text. But there are many problems with this view, especially in relation to other parts of this book (see, for example, 11.21) and in other books as well (see, for example, Exo 38.26, where the same number 603,550 occurs, and Exo 1.7, 9, where it is implied that the Egyptians were afraid because there were too many Israelites). And even if it were to be a valid point of view, the total number in verse 46 still shows that the text itself treats the thousands as part of the actual numbers. (The same applies to 26.51 in the context of chapter 26, the second census of the Israelites.) The word ʾelef in the census lists of Numbers must surely mean “thousand,” because every time it alternates with “hundred” and other numbers. Thus, as in the case of similar issues of this nature (where we lack the necessary explanatory or background information), it is the actual text with its high numbers that should be translated. The text may reflect an epic tradition that attributed great numbers to the Israelites in the wilderness, conveying a sense of the grandeur of the LORD’s army (so Davies, page 17; Levine, page 139; Milgrom, page 339); God promised many descendants to Abraham. The large numbers imply that there is no ground for Israel’s fear of other nations.

Good News Translation has severely reduced verses 20-46, and it has completely omitted verse 44. But Good News Translation‘s list layout in itself is helpful, not least because the Hebrew in verses 20-43 seems like a list: many of its sentences are not grammatically complete. Bible en français courant has a list layout as well but in a more convincing way: it combines only verses 20-43, while its rendering of verses 44-46 is set off as distinct, not part of the list as such. (Bible en français courant is also different from Good News Translation in that the list layout in Bible en français courant is without headings. Instead, every line in the list in Bible en français courant begins with “tribe of….”) Alternatively, for each tribe the verses about it can be put in a separate paragraph (so New International Version). The numbers can be printed in figures in any case, not only to make the translation easier to read but also because figures are probably more fitting in a list of this kind. Finally, even a translation similar to Revised Standard Version but with fewer or no verbs (so Revised English Bible, De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling) would bring out the list character of verses 20-43 more clearly.

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Exodus. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Numbers 1:47 - 1:49

But the Levites were not numbered by their ancestral tribe along with them: The conjunction But (literally “And”) may be needed in some languages to highlight the distinctive character of the tribe of Levi at the beginning of this new discourse unit. The Levites were the descendants of Levi, the third son of Jacob and Leah (see Gen 29.34; 35.23). To indicate that the Levites were a specific tribe descended from Levi, this phrase may be rendered “the descendants of Levi” or “the people of Levi.” For the Hebrew verb rendered were … numbered, see the comments on verse 3, where it is translated “number.” By their ancestral tribe is literally “by the tribe of their fathers.” “Fathers” has the sense of “ancestors” in this context. For tribe see verse 4. The pronoun them refers to the other Israelites tribes.

For the LORD said to Moses: For the LORD, which renders YHWH, the name of God in Hebrew, see verse 1. Good News Translation translates the verb said as “had said.” Unlike English, Hebrew has no separate verb form to express that something already took place earlier than the past, that is, before some other point in the past. So Good News Translation is not necessarily more accurate here. Although the verb “had said” shows that the LORD’s direct speech in verses 49-53 actually took place earlier, this verb may make the translation more difficult to follow. The Hebrew text of this chapter does not show an interest in the chronological order of things, but rather highlights what is most important to the account as it is being presented. It is only here in verses 48-49 that the text mentions for the first time that the LORD said that the Levites should not be included in the census.

The LORD’s instructions concerning the Levites occur in verses 49-53. In theory, these instructions could have been included in the LORD’s instructions concerning the census in verses 2-15 so that chronologically they would have come before the census itself was carried out (verses 17-46). But the fact that the instructions concerning the Levites only come as part of verses 48-53 shows that in this text things do not always come in their most likely chronological place but are mentioned where they are the most relevant or prominent. Coming after the statement in verse 47, the role of the Levites is made a separate and important theme. So the simple past tense form said is sufficient (and it may even be correct chronologically).

There is perhaps one more indication why the text does not intend to give chronological information here and why the simple past tense form said is sufficient. The conjunctions For and “because” (Good News Translation) are not based on the Hebrew at all. On the contrary, verse 48 begins literally with “And the LORD spoke….” Also the Leningrad Codex, on which Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia is based, has a minor break in the text between verses 47 and 48 (which has been adopted by New Revised Standard Version and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Thus verse 48 starts another theme in its own right—the role of the tribe of Levi—rather than giving chronological information. This interpretation is supported by the fact that this same expression also begins major discourse units at 1.1 and 2.1. Since the new topic of the Levites’ distinctive role among the tribes is preceded by a reference to them in verse 47 that closes the previous unit, we recommend that verses 47-54 be treated as one unit.

Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, and you shall not take a census of them among the people of Israel: The two Hebrew verbs here are in the singular (in contrast to the plural imperative in verse 2); God is only addressing Moses. You shall not number and you shall not take a census are synonymous. These two synonymous expressions and the clause-initial Hebrew particle ʾak rendered Only indicate that the LORD is speaking with some emphasis here. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh conveys this emphasis by saying “Do not on any account enroll the tribe of Levi or take a census of them with the Israelites.” Perhaps this extra force can be expressed in the target language as well, for example, by a corresponding emphatic particle or conjunction. For the Hebrew verb rendered number, see verse 3; for take a census, see verse 2. Good News Translation renders take a census as “take a census of the men fit for military service.” The phrase “of the men fit for military service” does not correspond with anything in the Hebrew, but it reminds the reader whose census it was and what it was about. If such a reminder is not needed in the translation, it should be omitted.

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .