Census

Fausset's Bible Dictionary

Μiphqad , "numbering combined with lustration" or "purification." By the law ( Exodus 30:12-13) half a shekel was to be paid by every man above 20 years as a ransom for his soul, that there should be no plague whenever a numbering of the people took place. The number at the census in the third or fourth month after the Exodus was 603,550 above 20 years ( Exodus 38:26); in  Exodus 12:37 the round number 600,000. There were besides 22,000 male Levites of a month old and upwards ( Numbers 3:39). Adding the wives and children we should have about 2,000,000. Of the 70 that went down to Egypt, after deducting Jacob, his 12 sons, Dinah, Zerah (Asher's daughter), Levi's three sons, the four grandsons of Judah and Benjamin, and those grandsons of Jacob who died without posterity, there remain at least 41 grandsons of Jacob who founded families, besides the Levites.

Reckoning 40 years as a generation, there would be ten generations passed in the 400th year of the sojourn in Egypt. Compare  1 Chronicles 7:20-27, where ten or eleven generations elapse between Ephraim and Joshua. Assuming three sons and three daughters to each married couple of the first six generations, and two sons and two daughters in the last four, there would be 478,224 sons about the 400th year of the sojourn, besides 125,326 of the ninth generation, still living; in all 603,550 men coming out of Egypt upward of 20 years old. Besides, the Israelites were under a special dispensation of fruitfulness from God, and preservation from plague and from serious diminution even by Pharaoh's repressive measures. In  Numbers 3:43 all the firstborn males for whom the Levites were accepted as a substitute are stated to be 22,273, which, if it were the suni of the firstborn sons in the entire nation, would require there to be 40 males begotten of each father in each family to make up 608,550 men of 20 years and upward, or a population of more than 1,000,000 males.

But  Exodus 13:2;  Exodus 13:11-12 shows that the law does not apply retrospectively, but only to the sanctification to God of all the firstborn of men and cattle that should be born from that time forward. It appears from  Numbers 3:13;  Numbers 8:17, God had actually sanctified already all the firstborn to Himself by having protected His people from the destroyer on the paschal night ( Exodus 12:22-23;  Exodus 4:22), and had adopted the whole nation in instituting the Passover. The presentation of their firstborn to the Lord thenceforth was to be the practical manifestation of their sonship. The number of Levites ( Numbers 3:39;  Numbers 3:51),  Numbers 3:22;  Numbers 3:000, does not agree with the numbers assigned to the three families 7,500 + 8,600 + 6,200 = 22,300. But the total is correct; for it is written, the number of the firstborn, 22,273, exceeded that of the Levites by 273.

Probably there is a copyist's error in the number of one of the Levitical families, perhaps in  Numbers 3:28 read 8,300 for 8,600. For the surplus 278 each was to pay five shekels, 1,365 in all. The earlier numbering for collecting atonement money from every male of 20 or upward ( Exodus 30:11-16;  Exodus 38:25-26) gave the same number, 603,550, as that nine months later ( Numbers 1:1-3-46;  Exodus 40:17), in the second month of the second year, four weeks after the rearing of the tabernacle. The reason is, because the former census for gathering the atonement head money was taken as the basis for mustering all fit for war nine months later. This latter mustering merely consisted in registering those already numbered in the public records according to their families and fathers' houses; probably according to Jethro's suggestion of classification for administering justice, namely, in thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens ( Exodus 18:25).

Each tribe was placed under a special leader; head of the tribe, as is usual among the Arabs to this day. The supernumerary units would be used to balance the changes that had taken place in the actual condition of the families and fathers' houses between the earlier provisional numbering and the subsequent preparation of the master rolls, so that the few changes that had taken place during the nine months' interval among those fit for war was made no account of, but the number was left the same. A new census was taken 38 years afterwards in the plains of Moab (Numbers 26) for the division of Canaan among the tribes according to their families ( Numbers 33:54). The number then was 601,730, of 20 years and upward, of whom Joshua and Caleb alone were in the former census, the whole generation having died in the wilderness. The tribe of Simeon especially suffered a diminution of its numbers; probably owing to the plague which followed Zimri's sin with Cozbi the Midianite woman ( Numbers 25:9-15;  Numbers 26:51;  Numbers 26:63-65; compare  Numbers 11:21).

The history does not detail the events of the intervening 38 years, but only of the beginning and the close of the 40 years. The total of Israel, including the 23,000 Levite males from a month old upwards, would be thus about 2,000,000 ( Numbers 26:62). The objection of rationalists that the peninsula of Sinai could not have sustained such a number is answered by the consideration (1) that Israel was sustained by a miracle, (2) the peninsula yielded much more anciently than at present. The destruction of the trees diminishes the rainfall; in the monumental period of ancient Egypt it is evident that the land was more cultivated; and the water in the wadies and the rain might, by artificial means, be made available to increase the fertility. The inscriptions of Sinai, Serbal, and the wady Mokatteb, and other valleys prove that formerly a numerous population lived there.

The next numbering was that by David, contrary to Joab's advice ( 2 Samuel 24:1-9;  1 Chronicles 21:1;  1 Chronicles 21:5;  1 Chronicles 27:24). "Satan stood up against Israel and provoked David to number Israel." Pride is peculiarly of Satan ( Isaiah 14:12), and proud presumption actuated David. It was not so much the act which was faultworthy (for indeed the taking of the census was recognized in the pentateuch:  Exodus 30:12) as the motive, trust in the arm of flesh instead of in Jehovah ( Jeremiah 17:5). Psalm 30 (see its authoritative heading, which ought to be read "A Psalm of David at the dedication of the house," namely, of God) commemorates "the dedication," or consecration, of the site whereon subsequently Solomon's temple was built. When David, after the plague sent for numbering the people, sacrificed upon an altar of burnt offering on the threshing floor of Araunah on mount Moriah, Jehovah by fire from heaven consecrated the place as "the house of God," even before the actual building of the temple (compare  1 Chronicles 22:1-2 with  Genesis 28:17-19).

Pride through prosperity, and a sudden, severe, but temporary, reverse appear in the psalm as in the history. The deliverance was the answer to David's prayer, Jehovah at the same time interceding; for while we pray below our Intercessor is pleading above (compare  Psalms 30:8-10 with  1 Chronicles 21:15-18). Apparently David had neglected to have the half shekel apiece payment made to God in recognition of His sovereignty ( Exodus 30:12-13); in which respect the people shared the guilt and therefore the punishment. Probably he sought popularity by omitting it. The number in  1 Chronicles 21:5 is 1,100,000 of Israel and 470,000 of Judah. But in  2 Samuel 24:9 of Israel 800,000, of Judah 500,000. The census was not completed, through the reluctance of Joab to proceed, and through David's revoking the order before it was finished.

The number was never put "in the account of the chronicles of King David" ( 1 Chronicles 27:24). Levi was omitted, as it was for men fit for war that the census was taken. Benjamin, which came last in order on the return home to Jerusalem, had not been numbered when the census was interrupted ( 1 Chronicles 21:6). The 30,000 difference in the number of Judah, as given in Chronicles and according to Samuel, was perhaps due to Benjamin being given in Samuel but not in Chronicles. or, possibly, Chronicles omits the 30,000 army of observation stationed on the Philistine frontier ( 2 Samuel 6:1). The 300,000 more in Israel according to Chronicles probably included the standing army in 24, courses of 24,000 each, i.e. 288,000 in all (1 Chronicles 27), besides 12 captains with 1,000 each as the king's own guard, in all 300,000, not counted in 2 Samuel 24.

These were in actual service; the larger numbers in the census are those capable of service. At best, oral tradition was the basis of the numbers here, seeing that it was not recorded in the chronicles of David. The whole population would thus amount to about 5,000,000; a number not too large for the well attested fertility of the land then to sustain. Even profane writers noticed Palestine's fertility, of which its present neglected state affords no test. God had promised a populous race. In A.D. 66, just before the Roman siege of Jerusalem, a census taken by the priests at the Passover gave the approximate number 2,700,000, independently of foreigners and those ceremonially defiled. 1,100,000 perished in the siege; 97,000 were taken captives. These facts give us a glimpse of the populousness of the Holy Land. Solomon completed David's census by causing the resident foreigners to be numbered and employed on his great works, namely, 153,600 ( 2 Chronicles 2:17-18; compare  Joshua 9:27).

Jehoshaphat's army was one of the largest, 1,160,000 ( 2 Chronicles 17:14-18); this probably included subject foreigners. The object of the census on the return from Babylon was to settle against the year of Jubilee the inheritances of the Holy Land ( Leviticus 25:10), which had been disarranged by the captivity, and to ascertain the family genealogies and ensure purity of Jewish blood. This accounts for differences appearing between the total and the details ( Ezra 2:59;  Ezra 2:64) of the 42,360 who returned with Zerubbabel, 12,542 belonging to other tribes than Judah and Benjamin ( Ezra 10:2;  Ezra 10:8;  Ezra 10:18;  Ezra 10:44; Nehemiah 7:1-67). (See Captivity .) The second caravan (458 B.C.) numbered 1496, exclusive of women and children ( Ezra 8:1-14). The genealogies (1 Chronicles 1-9) were compiled for a similar object.

The Septuagint and Josephus confirm in the main the correctness of the Scripture numbers. A "taxing" under Cyrenius, governor of Syria, is recorded  Luke 2:1; a disturbance caused by one Judas of Galilee "in the days of the taxing" is referred to in  Acts 5:37. God's providence overruled Augustus' order for the provincial enrollment of all persons and estates under Roman sway, to effect His foretold purpose that Bethlehem should be the scene of Jesus' nativity ( Micah 5:2)  Micah 5:4 B.C.; His parents going up there to be registered for the taxation, a plain proof that the foretold time for Shiloh's appearing was come, for "the scepter was departed from Judah" to Rome ( Genesis 49:10). Quirinus did not, according to history, become president of Syria until 9 or 10 years afterward, A.D. 6. But Justin Martyr thrice (Apol., 1:34,46; Trypho, 78) asserts Quirinus was president when Luke says he was.

Zumpt moreover has recently brought to light the interesting fact that, owing to Cilicia when separated from Cyprus being joined to Syria Quirinus as governor of Cilicia was also governor of Syria; his subsequent special connection with Syria caused his earlier and briefer one to be thus specified. The word "first" too is to be noticed: "this taxing," ordered by Augustus just before Jesus' birth, was interrupted by the Jews' bitter opposition, and "was first carried into effect" when Cyrenius was governor of Syria; grammatically the Greek expresses, "this taxing took place as a first one while Cyrenius was governor of Syria" (Ellicott). The omission, however, of the Greek article in one oldest manuscript (Vatican) would thus modify the translation, "this first taxation was carried into effect when Cyrenius," etc.

Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament

Census —This English word does not occur in the NT, the Greek term ἀπογραφή being rendered taxing in Authorized Version and enrolment in Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 both in  Luke 2:2 and in  Acts 5:37. In the former case, with which we are mainly concerned, ‘enrolment’ is certainly the better word; for the purpose of the enumeration was apparently not fiscal. That mentioned by Gamaliel, however, was a valuation as well as an enumeration, and it was called ‘the taxing’ with some reason. It was also better known than the other; par excellence it was ‘ the census’ because a great tumult arose under Judas of Galilee in connexion with it, which made the occasion famous. That which took place at the time stated by St. Luke was so little known by the period when his Gospel was written, that he thinks it needful to insert a note about its date, lest it should be mistaken for the other. ‘This was the first enrolment made when Quirinius was governor of Syria.’ This note, however, has been itself a matter of great perplexity, because the date thus indicated does not apparently tally with the ascertained facts of secular history. For the discussion of this intricate question see articles Birth of Christ, Dates, and Quirinius,

The nature of the census of  Luke 2:1-3 is a topic of some interest, on which light has been shed by Ramsay in Was Christ born at Bethlehem? (1898). It seems to have been an enrolment by households, such as Kenyon ( Classical Review , March 1893), Wilcken, and Viereck have shown was the practice in Egypt. Augustus had a great belief in the proper and systematic enumeration of his subjects, and the reckoning of them by households was a method which was carefully followed every fourteen years in Egypt. Many of the actual census papers have been found in that land in recent times, the earliest as yet discovered referring to the year 20 a.d. (Ramsay, op. cit. , Preface, p. x note). This was quite different from the fiscal statistics compiled annually under the direction of the provincial governors of the Roman Empire, papers dealing with which have also been found. The household enrolments took place in cycles of fourteen years, and were dated according to the emperor in whose reign they were carried out. No mention was made in them of the value of property and stock, as in the annual returns, and the only financial purpose they served was to determine who were liable for the poll-tax exacted from all subjects between the ages of fourteen and sixty. This poll-tax was the tribute (κῆνσος) referred to by the Pharisees in the question to Christ as to the lawfulness of payment ( Matthew 22:17; see art. Tribute) It would seem that in Syria women as well as men were required to pay this tax (Ramsay, op. cit. 147 note); and if that was the case also in Palestine, this fact may possibly explain why, on the first occasion when the enrolment that was the basis of the poll-tax was made, Mary accompanied Joseph to Bethlehem despite her critical condition.

The discovery of the household-enrolment papers in Egypt throws light on the statement of  Luke 2:1 ‘there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be enrolled.’ ‘All the world’ (πᾶσαν τὴν οἰκουμένην) was formerly supposed by some scholars, such as Kitto ( Cycl. of Bib. Lit ., art. ‘Cyrenius’), to mean merely the whole land of Palestine, so as to escape the difficulty that secular history, so far as then known, was silent as to any general census. The meaning of the phrase cannot be so restricted. It means certainly the whole of the Roman Empire, which in the days of Augustus meant for all practical purposes ‘the inhabited earth.’ Not only was Rome itself included, with all the provinces, whether in Italy or elsewhere, but also those lands which, though having kings of their own, were really under the Roman suzerainty. Such was that portion of Syria under the dominion of Herod the Great.

The silence of history as to such an enumeration as was now to be made is no proof that it did not take place; for of other enumerations to which casual allusion is made by historians, Augustus himself in his record of his achievements makes no mention, except in so far as Roman citizens were concerned. The counting of alien subjects was probably not deemed of sufficient importance to be chronicled. Moreover, the household enrolments which have been traced back in Egypt by extant papers to a.d. 20 suggest at least that there may have been earlier ones in a.d. 6 and b.c. 8, which brings us back to the approximate period to which St. Luke refers. It may here be observed that the Evangelist does not actually say ( Luke 2:1), and very likely does not mean, that the intention of Augustus was that one single enumeration should be made of the whole Roman world. The tense of ἁπογράφεσθαι rather signifies that a census of this nature on the household-enrolment principle was to be the practice, this being the first occasion of its being ordered; which precisely tallies with the following verse when rightly rendered, ‘This was the first enrolment made at the time when Quirinius was governor of Syria.’ A fuller discussion of this latter statement is reserved for the article Quirinius.

The enrolment with which we are particularly concerned, then, would be appointed for b.c. 8; but in the case of Herod’s kingdom it was not achieved till about a couple of years later, apparently for reasons which Ramsay has indicated, but which need not here be reproduced. They refer to the strained relations which then existed between Augustus and Herod. When it was made, the usual Roman method of enrolment at the residence of those enumerated was not followed, but one more in consonance with Jewish ideas. The people had often before been numbered by their tribes, and Herod probably judged that, especially on this first occasion of such an enrolment, the use and wont would be more acceptable to his subjects than a method new to them, and would be less likely to arouse resentment or even tumult. The Roman practice was to interfere as little as possible with the usages of the nations which had been subjugated; and therefore we may reckon that the particular method of taking the census would be left to the decision of the ruler of the district. Accordingly it was arranged that the tribal method should be followed, and that in subordination thereto the enrolment should be by persons registering themselves at the place from which the head of the family had sprung. Hence we read that ‘all went to enrol themselves, every one to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, to the city of David, because he was of the house and family of David, to enrol himself with Mary who was betrothed to him’ ( Luke 2:3-5). If, as  Matthew 1:25 leads us to believe, Mary was actually recognized at this period as Joseph’s wife, she would be enumerated as one of his household, whatever her own lineage was; but if St. Luke’s expression ‘betrothed’ is to be pressed, would indicate not merely that the marriage was not publicly known or officially recognized, but that she herself must also have been of the family of David, and as such was enrolled in her own right. It may also be observed that the great gathering of those who claimed to be of ‘the stock of Jesse’ would help to explain how, when Joseph and Mary arrived, ‘there was no room for them in the inn’ ( Luke 2:7).

Literature.— Lives of Christ and Commentaries on St. Luke; articles in Bible Dictionaries, as Smith, Kitto, and Hastings; Ramsay, Was Christ born at Bethlehem? (1898); Zumpt, Das Geburtsjahr Christi (1869); Zahn, art. in Neue kirchl. Ztsch. (1893); Schürer, HJ P [Note: JP History of the Jewish People.] i. ii. 105.

Arthur Pollok Sym.

Holman Bible Dictionary

Moses took a census of Israel at Mount Sinai and assessed a half-shekel tax to each male over twenty to support the tabernacle ( Exodus 30:13-16 ). Another census counted Israel's manpower available for war. This census excluded the Levites, separating them for service in the tabernacle ( Numbers 1:1 ). Another census was taken in Moab at the end of the wilderness wanderings, again excluding the Levites. The Hebrew may indicate the units used in the count reflect tribal units and not thousands, thus accounting for the large totals. David also counted Israel's warriors.  2 Samuel 24:1 says that the Lord incited David to carry out the census, and   1 Chronicles 21:1 says that Satan moved David to do so. In both accounts a pestilence was sent upon Israel because of the census.   Ezekiel 2:1 accounts for those who came out of Exile with Zerubbabel and Nehemiah.

The first census referred to in the New Testament concerns the decree by Caesar Augustus “that all the world should be taxed.” This “first census” was taken by Cyrenius, the governor of Syria ( Luke 2:1-5 ). Luke used this benchmark both as a general time reference and, more importantly, to set the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, the ancestral city of David. This passage has presented problems in that: one, there is no specific record of such a census outside the Lukan account and two, the date of Cyrenius's governorship (A.D. 6-9) appears to be inconsistent with the previous statement that Jesus' birth was in the reign of Herod the Great ( Luke 1:5 ), who died in A.D. 4. However, Luke's account is consistent with Roman practices, and such a census could well have been ordered by Cyrenius functioning as a military governor alongside the political governor Sentius Saturnius around 6 B.C., when most scholars date the birth of Jesus. The other reference is that of Gamaliel's remark about Judas of Galilee, who rose up “in the days of the census” only to later perish ( Acts 5:37 NIV).

Joel Parkman

Easton's Bible Dictionary

After the return from Exile the whole congregation of Israel was numbered, and found to amount to 42,360 ( Ezra 2:64 ). A census was made by the Roman government in the time of our Lord ( Luke 2:1 ). (See Taxing .)

Copyright Statement These dictionary topics are from M.G. Easton M.A., DD Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, published by Thomas Nelson, 1897. Public Domain.

Bibliography Information Easton, Matthew George. Entry for 'Census'. Easton's Bible Dictionary. https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/eng/ebd/c/census.html. 1897.

Morrish Bible Dictionary

In the N.T. the 'taxing' under Cyrenius is generally held to be a census: the word is ἀπογραφή, an enrolment or register. Florus the Roman historian says, that a census comprised "every one's estate, dignity, age, employment, and office;" this occasion may therefore have been only a preliminary to taxing. The Jews were apparently allowed to conduct the census in their own way as to lineage. It has been proved that Cyrenius (Quirinius) was twice governor of Syria, which removes all difficulty as to the date of the census in   Luke 2:1-5 . The same Greek word is translated 'taxing' in  Acts 5:37 , when Judas headed an insurrection.

Webster's Dictionary

(1): (n.) A numbering of the people, and valuation of their estate, for the purpose of imposing taxes, etc.; - usually made once in five years.

(2): (n.) An official registration of the number of the people, the value of their estates, and other general statistics of a country.

Smith's Bible Dictionary

Census. See Taxing .

Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible

CENSUS . See Quirinius.

Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

There are monographs in Latin on the census of Quirinus by Ammon (Erlang. 1810), Birch (Hafn. 1790), Bornitius (Vitel. 1650), Breithaupt (Helmst. 1737), Deyling (Observv. 2:326 sq.), Hasse (Regiom. 1706), Heumann (Gotting. 1732), Janus (Viteb. 1715; also in Ikenii Thes. 2:424 Eq.), Obrecht (Argentor. 1675), Perizonius (Diss. de Praetorio, s. f.), Pihlmann (Aboe, 1735), Richard (Viteb. 1704; also in Ikenii Thes. 2:434 Eq.), Volborth (Gotting. 175), Wedel (Jen. 1703), Wernsdorf (Viteb. 1693, 1720); in Greek, by Friberg (Abone, 1730); in German, by Kist (Utr. 1791), Pitschmann (Dub. vex. Hist. 1:1-25), Stockmann (Gron. 1756). (See Nativity).