ceptions to follow them to the heights that they had attained. The priestly age so distinctly foreshadowed in Ezekiel is at hand.

The conditions indicated by Malachi are those which Nehemiah finds when he reaches Jerusalem in 444 B.C. The work which this great leader must undertake is the rebuilding of the city walls. To carry out any thoroughgoing reforms, the people must be able to separate their worship, and, to some extent, their entire life from the intermingling of pagan and semi-pagan neighbors. This done, it is possible to maintain a rigid observance of the Sabbath and to put an effectual stop to the mixing of the Jewish blood through foreign marriage. With the establishment of a regular poll tax for the support of the temple worship, the wretched condition of this worship pictured by Malachi could not recur. The reforms carried out by Nehemiah are directed toward exactly the conditions that Malachi deplored and which seemed to him curable only by the refiner's fire.

Nehemiah's work was epoch-making; without it the perpetuation of the Jew and Judaism in Palestine would have been impossible. Its story is told by Nehemiah himself, in a notable memoir that is now embodied in the later book of Nehemiah as chapters 1-2, 4-7 5a, 12 31-32, 37-40, 13 4-30 2 From both the historical and literary point of view this memoir is one of the most interesting documents of ancient Israel; historically, it is the first-hand testimony of the leader of an undertaking that made possible the Judaism which persisted from 400 B.C. until the coming of Jesus, and has persisted even to the present day; as a piece of narrative, it is the autobiographical writing of one of the men who have determined the course of history during many centuries.

The Commentaries of Cæsar give no more vivid pictures of strategy and struggle and do not reveal the writer himself as intimately as this diary of Nehemiah. The night ride of inspection gives a picture that forever holds the imagination:

1 In this discussion it is assumed that the work of Ezra is later than that of Nehemiah. See Chapter XXI, p. 307.

2 In its present form, 13 +30 is probably recast by the editor of the present book. See Kent, Israel's Historical and Biographical Narratives, p. 362.

And I arose in the night, I and some few men with me; neither told I any man what my God put into my heart to do for Jerusalem; neither was there any beast with me, save the beast that I rode upon. And I went out by night by the valley gate, even toward the jackal's well, and to the dung gate, and viewed the walls of Jerusalem, which were broken down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire. Then I went on to the fountain gate and to the king's pool; but there was no place for the beast that was under me to pass. Then went I up in the night by the brook, and viewed the wall; and I turned back, and entered by the valley gate, and so returned. And the rulers knew not whither I went, or what I did; neither had I as yet told it to the Jews, nor to the priests, nor to the nobles, nor to the rulers, nor to the rest that did the work.1

The story of the plots to secure possession of Nehemiah's person or to discredit him reveal the man most interestingly.

Now it came to pass, when it was reported to Sanballat and Tobiah, and to Geshem the Arabian, and unto the rest of our enemies, that I had builded the wall, and that there was no breach left therein (though even unto that time I had not set up the doors in the gates), that Sanballat and Geshem sent unto me saying, Come, let us meet together in one of the villages in the plain of Ono. But they thought to do me mischief. And I sent messengers unto them, saying, I am doing a great work, so that I cannot come down: why should the work cease, whilst I leave it, and come down to you? And they sent unto me four times after this sort; and I answered them after the same manner. Then sent Sanballat his servant unto me in like manner the fifth time with an open letter in his hand, wherein was written, It is reported among the nations, and Gashmu saith it, that thou and the Jews think to rebel; for which cause thou art building the wall: and thou wouldst be their king, according to these words. And thou hast also appointed prophets to preach of thee at Jerusalem, saying, There is a king in Judah: and now shall it be reported to the king according to these words. Come now therefore, and let us take counsel together. Then I sent unto him, saying, There are no such things done as thou sayest, but thou feignest them out of thine own heart. For they all would have made us afraid, saying, Their hands shall be weakened from the work, that it be not done. But now, O God, strengthen thou my hands.

And I went unto the house of Shemaiah the son of Delaiah the son of Mehetabel, who was shut up; and he said, Let us meet together in the

1 Nehemiah 2 12-16.

house of God, within the temple, and let us shut the doors of the temple: for they will come to slay thee; yea, in the night will they come to slay thee. And I said, Should such a man as I flee? and who is there, that, being such as I, would go into the temple to save his life? I will not go in. And I discerned, and, lo, God had not sent him; but he pronounced this prophecy against me: and Tobiah and Sanballat had hired him. For this cause was he hired, that I should be afraid, and do so, and sin, and that they might have matter for an evil report, that they might reproach me. Remember, O my God, Tobiah and Sanballat according to these their works, and also the prophetess Noadiah, and the rest of the prophets, that would have put me in fear.1

Here as elsewhere the pervading impression is of the simplicity of the truly great man. Shrewd to see the machinations of his enemies, in his own life he was simple and direct, moving along broad, straight lines. The wealthy governor who needed not to collect the taxes of his little province for his own support; who yet entertained at his table day by day with regal generosity; the confidential, loved, and trusted officer of the ruler of the vastest and best governed empire the world had ever seen, shows us his heart with the simplicity of a child.

1 Nehemiah 6 1-14.

CHAPTER XXI

PRIESTLY IDEALS IN LAW AND HISTORY

(About 450 to about 300 B.C.)

THE Composite history of the exodus and wilderness periods which the Jews carried with them to Babylon contained the brief law codes of Exodus 20-23 and 24, ascribed to the Sinai period. This history, as edited and expanded during the exile, contained also the Deuteronomic code, ascribed to the east-Jordan sojourn. These codes dealt in part with laws of sacrificial worship, but the priestly ritual, as a whole, was handed down mainly through the unbroken usage and tradition of the sanctuary, until the destruction of Jerusalem interrupted for seventy years the temple worship. Then the exiled priests were stimulated to commit to writing and so preserve for future generations the ceremonial practices of Jehovah's worship. The first fruits of this movement were the code of laws now constituting chapters 17 to 26 (perhaps 11 also) of Leviticus and Ezekiel's plan for the restored temple-worship. We have noted already (Chapter XVII) that Ezekiel introduced into his plan some elements unknown before the exile. In some respects his ideas seem to be an advance upon those of Leviticus 17-26, which, it is inferred, was probably codified chiefly between 597 and 586. The central idea of this first Leviticus code is indicated by the frequent repetition "Be ye holy, for I am Jehovah your God" and similar phrases, which have led to its designation, in modern times, as the "Law of Holiness." Some of the laws deal with general social relations, but the chief interest of the code is ritual purity. Doubtless these laws embody very ancient practice, but in some features they show development beyond those of Exodus 20-23 and Deuteronomy 12-26.

After the temple was rebuilt in 520-516 B.C., we have seen from contemporary evidence that worship was conducted in a wretched way down to the time of Nehemiah. Meanwhile the

greater portion of the people remained in Babylonia, and the priestly portion of the community busied itself in codifying and further developing the law, against the day when there might come a more complete restoration. The result of their labors is seen in the remainder of Leviticus and many laws of kindred form and character in Exodus and Numbers.

The older combined history, even with its Deuteronomic editing, did not adequately present certain aspects of the history from the priestly point of view. The priests in Babylonia were, for example, greatly interested in preserving pure tribal blood and developed elaborate genealogies. As time passed by, therefore, the men who wrote the ritual laws, or others of kindred spirit, were moved to write a genealogical and historical outline into which the laws might be fitted, as those of the earlier codes were fitted into the history already existing. These men felt the great importance of preserving the sense of family and tribal identity and the national religious customs, such as the Sabbath, circumcision, and the sacrifices. Above all they would emphasize the covenant relation between Jehovah and Israel, the very basis of their religion, in distinction from the religions that regarded the gods as belonging to certain districts or tribes intrinsically, rather than by voluntary choice and mutual agreement. In briefly rewriting the history, they brought out the covenant idea and recorded the institution of the ritual practices, as it seemed to them these must have developed from the earliest times. Into this as a framework they fitted their law codes as given at Sinai, where they accounted the most elaborate ecclesiastical organization to have been established, quite contrary to the representation of the earlier histories.1

It is one of the easiest tasks of Old Testament criticism to dis

1 This recalls the phrase from later Rabbinic literature, "a law from Moses on Sinai." Under this caption were included parts of the oral law (as distinguished from the written or Old Testament code) which had previously not been definitely formulated or gathered in writing. This phrase for centuries was taken literally to mean that these oral laws were also given by Moses on Sinai. More critical study has suggested that it is but a projection in time back to Moses and to Sinai of such common customs and laws as had become binding after centuries of usage. The process is interesting as being parallel to the above.