From the number of the Kings and peoples counted in the previous question, a not difficult conjecture can be made about the multitude of the enemies. Yet Scripture indicates it in a twofold [way] (v. 4).
First, as to the foot-soldiers: “A people,” it says, “exceeding many” — that is, very many, exceedingly many. For that “exceeding [nimis]” is often taken so, as when it is said “God exceedingly praiseworthy” [Ps. 47]; and in Plautus (Amphitryon, act 1): “Legions endowed with exceeding beautiful eyes.” And that this multitude of the enemies may be shown the more, a comparison is added: “As the sand which is on the sea-shore.” Arias reckons that comparison [to be] a true one — made not by reason of number, and (that I may speak philosophically) not by reason of “discrete quantity,” but rather “continuous,” as to sight; because, just as on the sea-shore nothing but sand is seen, so [there] nothing but “enemies” would then be seen. For thus he speaks: “The history does not say [that] the multitude of the enemies was comprehended by number, no otherwise than [that] the sea-sand could [not be]; but it says [that] their forces were so dense and thronging, that wherever the place was looked out over, nothing else than a people would be seen, and there was one [uniform] face of the field, covered with men — just as, to those who look out over the sea-shore, all the ground is seen strewn with sand: for nowhere is a portion of meadow, or anything besides sand, discerned; and therefore [Scripture] speaks properly: for it says not ‘many men,’ but ‘a people exceeding many’; nor does it say ‘as the sand’ [in the sense] that they cannot be numbered wherever they be, but ‘as the sand’ — that is, as far and wide is spread that sand which is on the sea-shore, whose whole surface is seen strewn with sand by the constant surging of the waves.” But indeed the whole force of the comparison lies in the number and multitude. For, First: otherwise it would have said better, “as the water of the sea,” or “the surface of the deep,” or “as the heaven.” For as someone said of old, “All was sea [pontus],” so often to those sailing nothing but sea and sky is discerned. Secondly: In the Hebrew the comparison is put thus: “as the sand which [is] on the sea-shore for multitude,” or “in respect of multitude” — which our [Interpreter] before expressed by “exceeding.” Thirdly: The Lord uses the same or a similar comparison to show number (Gen. 13:16; ch. 22:17; Jer. 33:22). Fourthly: [It] is, of all [these], an exposition about number. But indeed, [is] that comparison one which consorts with truth? For [things] which cannot be done, and in no way numbered, are wont to be compared with the numbering of sand. Lucan (bk. 5)
(col. 1061)
“The measure of the Ocean, the number of the sand, shall not fail.” Horace (bk. 1, ode 28): “thee, the measurer of the sea and the land, and of the numberless sand.” And the greatest of the Poets [Virgil] (Georgics 2): “—for it profits not to comprehend by number [him] whom, [if] one would wish to know, he would wish likewise to learn how much sand of the Libyan sea is stirred by the West wind.” Whence, as though [it were] a work greater than [is possible for] the wit, force, and power of man, that vain Apollo, in Herodotus (bk. 1), boasted of himself: οἶδα ἐγὼ ψάμμου τ᾽ ἀριθμόν, καὶ μέτρα θαλάσσης [oida egō psammou t’ arithmon, kai metra thalassēs, “I know the number of the sand, and the measures of the sea”]. Archimedes indeed once wrote a little book on numbering the sand, which was for that reason called ψαμμίτης [psammitēs, “the Sand-reckoner”]; and its method our Clavius inserts into his commentaries on the sphere. Yet it must be simply confessed [that] the number of the sea’s sand can be comprehended by the calculation or knowledge of no man whatever, but of God alone. For Archimedes effects only this much: [that] if some number of the sand be pronounced by someone (even though he not know it to be such), some number can, on such a hypothesis being granted (however false), be established — even if that sand were heaped up and piled to the very heaven. Whence, at length, it must be said [that], to signify the greatest multitude of the enemies, Scripture uses that comparison hyperbolically, as St. Augustine noted (bk. 16, City [of God], ch. 21): “It can seem to pertain to this: ‘And I will make thy seed as the sand of the earth’ — which was said by that locution which the Greeks call ‘hyperbole,’ which is indeed tropical, not proper. Yet in what manner [it is used], no one who has learned [scripture] doubts that scripture is wont to use [it], as [it uses] the other tropes. But this trope — that is, mode of speech — occurs when that which is said is far greater than what is signified by that saying. For who does not see how incomparably greater is the number of the sand than can be [the number] of all men from Adam himself to the end of the age? How much more, then, than the seed of Abraham — not only [that] which pertains to the Israelite nation, but also [that] which is, and will be, according to the imitation of faith, in the whole world, among all nations? Which seed, in comparison of the multitude of the impious, is indeed [but] a few; although these few too make their own multitude innumerable, which was signified, according to hyperbole, by the sand of the earth. Indeed, that multitude which is promised to Abraham is innumerable not to God, but to men. But to God, not even the sand of the earth [is innumerable]. Accordingly, because not only the Israelite nation, but the whole seed of Abraham — where there is an express promise — [is] not according to the flesh, but according to the spirit of very many sons, [it] is more fittingly compared to the multitude of the sand: [and] here the promise made of both things can be understood. But we said this for [the reason] that [it] does not evidently appear, because the multitude even of that one nation, which was born according to the flesh from Abraham through his grandson Jacob, grew so much that it almost filled all the parts of the world. And therefore it too could be compared, according to hyperbole, to the multitude of the sand: because this multitude too, alone, is innumerable to man.”
Secondly, as to the horsemen and chariots: “horses,” says the text, “and chariots of an infinite multitude”; in the Hebrew and Greek, “very many.” But both this number [and] the former, Josephus noted signally, saying [that] “there were of armed foot-soldiers 30 myriads — that is, three hundred thousand; of horsemen, a myriad — that is, ten thousand; of chariots, two myriads — that is, twenty thousand” (corruptly, in Zonaras, 30,000 [chariots]). Truly a great multitude, this. But whether he conjectured it, or received it from the ancients, or the annals, or the discourses of men, I have not, for my part, [anything] to say. Certainly neither Masius nor Arias give it credence.