War. The author of the new edition of St. Jerome mentions two manuscripts and there are several printed editions, which reduce these numbers to one half. Castalio adopts this correction, asserting that the Greek and Josephus are on his side, which is not true. (Calmet)

We must however observe, that there is some doubt with respect to Josephus, (Haydock) as some of the oldest Latin editions acknowledge the smaller numbers; and Vignoles (i. 29.) conjectures, that the Greek copies did the same formerly, since Aborbanel “accuses Josephus of having made Jeroboam’s loss no more than 50,000, contrary to the Hebrew text,” ver. 17. This learned author is of opinion, that the Jews sometimes expressed their numbers by figures, (Kennicott) analogous to those which the later Arabs borrowed from the Indians; though, in more ancient times, the letters of the alphabet had been used. Both customs seem to have prevailed; (Erpenius) and this may account for many variations, as the omission of a single cypher, resembling our period (.), might easily occasion much confusion. Kennicott (Diss. i., and ii.) seems to suspect, that the ancient versions have been made to agree with the corrupted Hebrew, no less than Josephus; and that many of the large numbers, recorded in Scripture, (which might countenance what we here read) are incorrect. See chap. xvii. 13, 19., and xiv. 8., comp.[compare] with xvi. 1., and xxv. 6., comp.[compare] with 4 Kings xiii. 7. It is certain (Haydock) many Latin manuscripts confirm the edition of Sixtus V, which has the smaller numbers; and this is the case with most of the older manuscripts and editions. How St. Jerome expressed it, we cannot easily determine. The editor of his works has been guided chiefly by the Memmian canon. See 2 Kings xv. 7. Lyranus quotes St. Jerome, as reading 50,000; (ver. 7) and it is so expressed in the Paris editions of 1534 and (Haydock) 1546, of the Hebrew questions on Paralipomenon. But Erasmus doubts whether this be the genuine work of St. Jerome, (Kennicott) or in the state in which he left it. If we consult the more ancient manuscripts and editions, prior to that of Clement VIII, we shall allow that they are more favourable to the smaller numbers, on this occasion; and are more likely to exhibit the pure version of the holy doctor, (Haydock) as the later editions have had “the Hebrew fountains” also in view. (Kennicott)

If however we adhere to the received numbers, (Haydock) we must remember that kings, at that time, led forth to battle all their subjects who were able to bear arms. Under Moses there were 600,000. David found 1,100,000 in Israel, and 470,000 in Juda, exclusive of Levi and Benjamin; (chap. xxi. 5.) or, at least, as it is expressed [in] 2 Kings xxiv. 9., in all, 1,300,000. Asa was at the head of 580,000, chap. xiv. 8., &c.