LEVITICUS, BOOK OF. The Book of Leviticus is the third book in the first division of the Canon of the Old Testament (q.v.). In the Hebrew Bible it bears the title " and he called." This is the first of the opening words of the book : " And Jehovah called unto Moses and spake unto him." The title in the Septuagint is and in the Vulgate Leviticus. In each case the word Book is to .be supplied. The English title is borrowed from the Vulgate. The " Levitical book " is so called not because it deals specially with the Levites, who in fact are mentioned only once (xxv. 32 ff.), but because it contains " the law of the priests." In the Mishnah (q.v.) it is called either Torath cOhanim, " Law of Priests," or Sepher cOh5nim, " Book of Priests," or Sepher korbanoth, " Book of Offerings." The subject matter and linguistic characteristics of the Book of Leviticus show that it belongs entirely to the priestly stratum of the Hexateuch, which is commonly designated P. But though the book as a whole is clearly dis tinguished from the other main strata of the Hexateuch, J (the Jehovistic or Jndahite), E (the Elohistic or Ephramite), and D (the Deuteronomic). it is not itself a literary unity. As Prof. G. A. Barton says (Jewish. Encycl.), Leviticus as It stands is not " a consistent code of laws formulated at one time, but is the result of a con siderable process of compilation." There are sections in P which differ linguistically from other sections; there are duplicate laws which imply diversity of date and origin. This has led to the separation within the main stratum P, or the Priests' Code, of other strata which have been designated Po, PH, PT, and Ps. These symbols may be explained in the order given. The letter G in Pa is an abbreviation of the German word Grundschrift, " groundwork." Po denotes the matter which formed the groundwork or basis of the Pentateuch, a legal and historical nucleus, to which was added from time to time matter of a different and varied character. The theme of this nucleus or kernel is, as Prof. Kennedy says, " the history of the establishment of the theocracy and of the introduction of those laws, institutions, and rites by which the divine sovereignty received visible expression." To PG belong in Leviticus the directions concerning the consecration of the priesthood (Lev. ix.-x.). the Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi.), the sacred calendar (xxiil. 4-8, 23-25, 33-38), the lamps and shewbread (xxiv. 1-9). According to Kennedy Po was composed about 500 B.C.; according to Kent, somewhere between 450 and 400 B.C. The letter H in PH is an abbreviation of the word " Holi ness." PH, or H alone, is a section of the Book of Leviticus (xvii.-xxvi.) which is distinguished by linguistic and other characteristics of its own. The underlying thought of this Code of Holiness may be found in Lev. xxii. 31-33: " Ye shall observe my commands and do them : I am Jehovah. And ye shall not profane my holy name; but I will be treated as holy among the Israelites. I am Jehovah who maketh you holy, who brought you out of the land of Egypt. to be your God : I am Jehovah " (cp. xix. 2; xx. 7, 8, 26, xxi. 6-S, 15, 23; xxii. 9, 16). Holiness, both moral and ceremonial, is insisted upon. The Code of Holiness, like the Book of the Covenant (Exodus xx. 24-xxiii. 19) and the Den teronomic Code (Dent. xx.-xxvi.), opens with a law regu lating altar sacrifices and ceremonies (Lev. xvii.), and closes with an exhortation (Lev. xxvi.). Even Pa, short as it is, is a compilation from various sources, and has been interpolated to some extent by P. In eh. xvii., for instance, vss. 1, 2, 15, 16, and references to " the tent of meeting " and " the camp " in vss. 3, 4, 5, and 6 are lnterpolations. So are verses 1, 2a, 8b, 21 and 22 in ch. xix. An interesting and important question with regard to the Code of Holiness is : What is the precise relation ship of the Code to the Book of Ezekiel? There are many parallels and resemblances between Ezekiel and H. They are given fully in Carpenter and Ha-rford-Battersby (i. 147 f.). Ezekiel was ft priest as well as a prophet. in fact he was born a priest. In 597 B.C. he was taken captive to Babylonia. Here he devoted himself at first to the work of a preacher. Towards the close of his career, however, he occupied himself with the prepara tion of the Code contained in Ezek. xl.-xlviii. (572 B.C.). Now, while this code reproduces many of the ceremonial laws, etc., of the pre-exilic temple, it contains also regula tions which are quite new (e.g.. xliv. 7, 8. xliv. 13). It
was not actually adopted as a whole, but it prepared the way for the priestly codes that were ultimately accepted. It is further noteworthy that in all Ezekiel's laws and exhortations the greatest stress is laid on the holiness of Yahweh and on the necessity that his people also should be holy. And, as we have seen, the same stress and emphasis are found in the Code of Holiness. Kent con cisely presents the resemblances between H and Ezekiel as follows : " The impressive refrain, I am Jehovah, is repeated forty-six times. and is one of many common characteristics that distinguish these laws. The same expression is also found seventy-eight times in Ezekiel. and not once in the writings of his earlier contemporaries. Isaiah and Jeremiah. There are many other striking points of contact both in vocabulary and idiom. The unusual formula beginning, Every man of the house of Israel (Lev. xvii. 3, S, 10, 13, 15), is found nowhere else in the Old Testament except in Ezekiel, where it is very common (e.g., Ezek. xiv. 4, 7, 8, xliv. 10, 12). The social crimes especially prohibited in the Holiness Code (e.g.. xviii. 8, xx. 10-12, 17, xix. 13, 15, 36, xx. 9, xxi. 1-5) are denounced by Ezekiel in terms almost identical (e.g., xxii. 10, 11, xviii. 7. S, 12, 16, xxxiii. 15, 25, xlv. 10, xxii. 7, xliv. 25, 20). A like emphasis is also laid on the sanctity of the temple (cf. Lev. xix. 30, xx. 3, xxi. 12, 23, xxvi. 2 and Ezek. v. 11, viii. 6, xxiii. 3S, 39). Both seek to guard the priesthood from all possible defilement. Thus in language, thought and purpose, Ezekiel and the laws of the Holiness Code are bound together by closest ties." The question then that arises is : Did H influence Ezekiel, or did Ezekiel influence H? According to G. A. Barton, this remains an open question. Various critics, how ever, have decided for the probability of the one view or the other. Wellhausen, Suellen, Baentsch, and Addis think H is later than Ezekiel. Barton, Kennedy, Kent, and others think H is earlier. According to Kent, " a detailed comparison of the two systems leads to the con clusion that both come from the same priestly circles and approximately the same date, but that Ezekiel was acquainted with the major portion of the laws in the Holiness Code." He thinks the original draft of H was made between the first and final captivity (597-586 B.C.). Kennedy too regards it as " a pre-exilic document, dating probably from near the close of the monarchy." Barton again thinks it probable that it was complied in Palestine. In the symbol Pr the T is an abbreviation of the Hebrew word toroth. Pr denotes a stratum composed of old sacrificial toroth, or priestly " decisions." In Ps the S is an abbreviation of the word " Secondary." Ps denotes secondary strata of the Priests' Code. Returning to P as a whole, Barton thinks that in its main features it was in the hands of Ezra and Nehemiah. The Book of Leviticus, however, " is not the work of the P who wrote the account of the sacred institutions, but of an editor who dislocated that work at many points, and who combined with it the Holiness Code and other elements." There is another Interesting question : Was the Levitical ritual influenced by Babylonian institutions? The remarkable Babylonian Code of Khammurapi (q.v.), which was discovered in 1901 and 1902, goes back to about the year 2250 B.C.. and it is itself no doubt a com pilation from much earlier laws and customs. At two periods in their history the Israelites came into direct contact with Babylonian culture, so that if one nation was powerfully influenced by the other, it would not be surprising. P. Haupt claims that the Levitical ritual was so influenced. He even finds in it a number of Babylonian loan-words. Barton and Kent, however, decide, no doubt rightly, that any deep Babylonian in fluence Is to be doubted. The external analogies are certainly striking, but, in the words of Kent, " the majority of the Old Testament laws are informed by a spirit and purpose which have no ancient parallel." See J. E. Carpenter and G. Harford-Battersby, 1900; C. F. Kent, Israel's Laws and Legal Precedents, 1907; E. Kautzsch, Die Heilige Schrift des Alten Testaments, 3rd ed. 1908-10; S. It. Driver and H. A. White, Leviticus in " Sacred Books of the Old Testament " : Hebrew, 1894 ; English, 1598; A. Dillmann, Exodus and Leviticus, 1897; B. Baentsch, Exodus-Leviticus, 1900; A. Bertholet, Levi ticus, 1901; D. Hoffmann, Das Buch Leviticus, 1905-6; A. R. S. Kennedy, Leviticus and Numbers in the " Cen tury Bible."