b

bites, and Egyptians-; that they had freely taken Gentile wives, 'so that the holy seed had been mingled with the people of those lands;'a and that in these practices the Hebrew princes and chiefs were the most conspicuous. The vehemence of Ezra's grief and indignation will be understood by considering the light in which he read the past history of his people. He read it in the light of Deuteronomy which then, more than a century and a half after its promulgation, had attained the highest authority. To Ezra the land of Canaan was 'a land unclean with the filthiness of the people from one end to another;' and to him the command was inviolable, 'Do not seek their peace and their welfare for ever, that you may be strong.'e He apprehended, therefore, Israel's annihilation by Divine resentment as an unfailing consequence of those unholy alliances, and he gave himself up to the bitterest outbursts of pain and mourning. Touched by his earnestness, the people promised to dismiss their foreign wives together with their offspring. The obligation was sealed with a sacred oath sworn by 'the chiefs of the priests, the Levites, and all Israel.' A proclamation was issued through the whole of the Jewish territory ordering all men to assemble in Jerusalem within three days on the penalty of forfeiture of property and expulsion from the congregation. The summons was obeyed; after three months, the measure was carried out in all possible completeness, and the historical records furnish a long list of priests who divorced their heathen wives.d

About fourteen years later (B. C. 444), Nehemiah, disquieted by reports of the sad condition of Jerusalem, requested of the Persian king Artaxerxes the favour of being sent to Judaea as governor. Severer and more inexorable than Ezra, and more directly intent upon the practical requirements of the com

a Ezra ix. 2. b Ezra ix. 11. c Ver. 12; comp. supra p. 42.

d Ezra ix. x.; comp. 1 Esdr. viii. 68-xi. 36.

munity, he initiated the most useful public works and carried out the most pressing social reforms, and among these was one which engaged his special zeal. 'In those days,' so he relates himself, 'I saw Jews who had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab; and their children spoke partly the language of Ashdod, and could not speak the language of the Jews, but according to the tongue of each people.' Had Ezra's measures, we must ask in surprise, been imperfect notwithstanding the emphatic protestations to the contrary? or were the Hebrews, in spite of promise and oath and covenant, utterly uncontrollable in their deep-rooted propensities for entering into matrimonial alliances with their kindred tribes? The Jews, yielding to Nehemiah's violent remonstrance and angry compulsion, renewed their devout pledges, and thenceforth kept them more scrupulously.

d

The Book of Deuteronomy, which was to Nehemiah 'the Book of the Law of Moses that Jahveh commanded Israel,' was again and again read to the people, and when these heard the words, The Ammonite and the Moabite shall not come into the congregation of the Lord for ever,' they 'separated from Israel all strangers.'e 'e It is important to ascertain the precise meaning of this statement. When on an earlier occasion, on a great day of fasting and penitence, a religious assembly was held, 'the seed of Israel,' so the historian remarks clearly, 'separated themselves from all aliens.' The contradistinction between Hebrews and strangers is absolute and unqualified. The limited prohibition with respect to

a Nehem. xiii. 23; comp. Nehemiah's contemporary Malachi (ii. 11, 12), 'Judah hath dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah hath profaned the Sanctuary of Jahveh, which He loveth, and hath married the daughters of

a strange god; Jahveh will cut off the man who doeth this,' etc.

b Neh. xiii. 23-29; comp. x. 31. c Neh. viii. 1; comp. vers. 3, 13, 14; ix. 2; x. 30, etc. d See supra p. 42. y; Neh. xiii. 1—3; comp. Exod. xii. 38; Num. xi. 4,,DN. f Neh. ix. 2, 552.

e

Moab and Ammon is generalised, and peculiar stress is laid upon Hebrew descent. Now, it might be supposed, the particularist's ideal was reached. It was indeed attained so far as it could at all be realised by theory and intention. But first, we read only of 'a separation,' but neither of an expulsion nor an extermination; and then we find very soon afterwards that the principle was not, and could not be, carried out. When the various representatives of the Jewish people took their oath upon the new Covenant and the Law of God, the solemn ceremony included also 'the Nethinim and all who had separated themselves from the people of the lands to the Law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters;'b just as previously the Passover celebrated under Ezra's supervision was kept by 'all those who had separated themselves from the uncleanness of the heathen of the land and joined the children of Israel, to seek Jahveh the God of Israel.' From the earliest times, the Hebrews, whether guided by inclination or necessity, had suffered the strangers; in the later periods of their political weakness, they could hardly dispense with them. But more decidedly than ever we see principle in hostile opposition to life, and ecclesiastical system to natural humanity. Principle and system, in creating an unconquerable abhorrence against foreign marriages, had gained one signal victory;

a Comp. Ezra x. 11, 77

to; but the passage applies to those Gentiles who renounced their idols in favour of Jahveh; this is, in Neh. x. 29, evident from the con

מעמי הארץ וכי

הנתינים וכל הנבדל,29 .b Neh. x מעמי הארצות אל תורת האלהים וכ'

כל הנבדל מטמאות ,21 .Ezra vi הנתינים with כל הנבדל nection of גוי הארץ אליהם לדרש ליהוה אלהי

b. This passage, like that quoted from Nehemiah (x. 29), does not, as has been asserted, refer to the descendants of those Israelites who had remained behind in Palestine during the captivity; for these are never specially alluded

(see Comment. on Lev. i. 584, 585), and in Ezra vi. 21, by the addition

מחזיקים The words אלהי ישראל

Dy in Neh. x. 30 point back to all who had been mentioned

ושאר העם ,immediately before who were the הכהנים הלוים וכי

brethren' of the more influential

but another great struggle was imminent, the issue of which was necessarily conclusive as to Israel's destinies and their position with respect to other nations. That issue did not tarry in coming and in making itself felt.

a

For the voice of the last of the prophets had been raised (B. C.430); like that of his predecessors it had been directed against 'the sorcerers and the adulterers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and who vex the stranger;' it had announced fearful and approaching judgments; and, like all previous warnings, it had died away unheeded. Instead of leading the people by the light of truth and liberty, the teachers were compelled-and they would have been compelled had they even themselves been filled with the prophetic spirit of better times-to chain them by the bonds of fear and ceremonialism. Continuing the legislative work of Ezra and Nehemiah, they helped to build up the imposing system of the Levitical Law, which was for ever to impart to the Jewish nation a specific character. This system was diligently, though not always successfully, blended with the earlier codes; it was, like these, traced to the old and hallowed name of Moses, who was affirmed to have received the statutes from God Himself; and thus at last the Pentateuch was completed, the beginnings of which reach back to a remote past, but whose middle Books, unfolding the Levitical precepts and narrating the ancient events in a similar light, embody the result of political and religious efforts extending over more than a thousand years. Now how does that final legislation conceive and fix the relative position of Hebrews and strangers?

It is, above all, most remarkable and important to notice that it was the Levitical Law which first divided

men who had been among the first in confirming the covenant comp.

העם ישראל also Ezra ix. 1, where

עמי הארצות is in juxtaposition to

as in Neh. x. 29.

a Mal. iii. 2-5, 13-21.

the strangers into two distinct and clearly defined classes. For in addition to the old term ger (1), we there meet with the new expression toshav () never used in any of the previous legal enactments; nor is it difficult to point out the mutual relation of both. A strict line of distinction was drawn between those Gentiles who desired to establish more intimate connections with the Hebrews, and those who intended neither a permanent settlement nor a closer approach. The former were received into the religious communion of the Jewish congregation, the latter into the social communion of the Jewish people; the one entered into the holy guardianship of the theocracy, the other simply enjoyed the protection of the civil laws. To the first class was given the old and general name of 'strangers' (ger, ), although it was etymologically no longer fully appropriate, while the others were called 'sojourners' (toshav, n). It is natural that these sojourners, who had no deeper interest in the land, were frequently employed as 'hirelings' () or were bought as slaves, although they often acquired landed property and then exercised influence even over Hebrews.c

a Then is distinguished, on the one hand, from the or 'foreigner,' and on the other hand from the (Exod. xii. 43, 45, 48), and that term thenceforth possessed a technical or legal import as clear and sharp as that of (Lev. v. 45, 47). As a rule, an occur in co-ordination as the two different categories conjointly embracing all that were not 'natives' or Hebrews (Lev. xxv. 35; Num. XXXV. 15); but sometimes in,

as the narrower expression, is subordinated to the primary and all-comprehending name (Lev.