CHAPTER THREE

PRIESTS AND LEVITES

A. INTRODUCTION

Ezekiel's attitude towards the priests and Levites has been the subject of much discussion since Wellhausen made it pivotal to his reconstruction of the history of the priesthood in . According to Wellhausen, the distinction between priests and Levites is an innovation of the . Before Ezekiel's time all Levites were regarded as priests, whether they served at the high places dotted around the countryside or in Jeru• salem. With Josiah's reform, the Ievitical priests from the country high places were effectively made redundant; Deuteronomy 18 had made prov• ision for them to come up to , but this provision was blocked in tum by the Jerusalemite priests, a situation recorded, in Wellhausen's opinion, in 2 Kings 23:9. As one of the Jerusalemite priests, Ezekiel "hangt bloss der Logik der Tatsachen einen moralischen Mantel urn", explaining why this de facto situation should prevail de jure. 1 This interpretation of Ezekiel44:6ff. has had an enormous influence which continues, with some minor modifications, down to the present day. 2 Of course, Wellhausen's views have not been without opposition; on the one hand, for example, Gunneweg has posed the question of whether the identification Levites = priests is true for the older period,3 and on the other Wellhausen's inter• pretation of has been challenged in a variety of ways by Abba, Duke, Greenberg, McConville and Hals. 4 Since the work of Gese, it has also become a commonplace to identify Ezekiel 44:6ff. as part of a "Zadokite stratum" or as a "Zadokite section", one of the latest additions to chapters 40-48, which affected other parts of

1 J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur Geschichte lsraels (Berlin '1886) l24f. 1 Cf. e.g. N. Allan, "The Identity of the Jerusalem Priesthood During the Exile", Hey J 23 ~1982) 259f.; J. Bowman, "Ezekiel and the Zadokite Priesthood", TGUOS 16 (1955-6) 2. Gunneweg, Leviten und Priester, 220. • Cf. R. Abba, "Priests and Levites in Ezekiel", lrT 28 (1978) 1-9; R.K. Duke, "Punishment or Restoration: Another Look at the Levites of Ezekiel 44:6-16", JSOT 40 (1988) 61-81; M. Greenberg, "A New Approach to the History of the Israelite Priesthood", lAOS 70 (1950) 41-7; and J.G. McConville, "Priests and Levites in Ezekiel: a Crux in the Interpretation of Israel's History", TynB 34 (1983) 3-32. Note especially the categorical conclusion of Hats: "Although it would be wonderful to have historical information on the details of the rise to power of Zadokites and their relationship with both the menial Levites of priestly tradition and the powerful Levitic leaders spoken of by the Chronicler, this text in Ezekiel neither provides us with such information nor helps in the reconstruction of it, for it has a far different intention" (Ezekiel, 321). PRIESTS AND LEVITES 59 these chapters by the addition of a string of harmonizing glosses. 5 This stratum is still seen as having a strong polemical intent as part of the Zadokite "battle programme", 6 just as in Wellhausen's thought, but now the Zadokite polemicist is separated from the prophet Ezekiel. What cem• ents this separation for most interpreters is precisely an apparent contra• diction between the prophecies of the first part of the book and chapter 44. For example, it is considered by Zimmerli "undenkbar" that one who described the state of affairs in the Temple in chapter 8 could exonerate the Zadokites from blame in Ezekiel 44:15.7 A thorough examination of the connection between the critique of priestly leadership and its future is needed to determine if this apparent contradiction is really valid.

ExcuRSus: Is THERE A HIGH PRIEST IN THE ?

The apparent absence of the figure of the High Priest from -48 has often been noted, with a variety of explanations. 8 Yet the apparent absence of the High Priest from chapters 1-39 is perhaps equally striking, if seldom commented upon, in view of the cultic abuses which are descr• ibed. Certainly it is not because such a figure did not yet exist: an instit• ution such as the late pre-exilic Temple would have required a body of priests with the concomitant necessity for organization. 9 Evidence for such organization is not lacking in the biblical documents. In the early days of the Temple, a simple familial structure would have sufficed with all the priests being under the authority and discipline of the family head, who was simply referred to as "The Priest" (hakkohen). This title persisted even after the organizational structure of the Temple became more complicated: throughout the it is the most common title for the High Priest. 10 Alongside this title, other titles began to develop, notably hiiro's, 11 hakkohen haro's and hakkohen haggiidol. The former title is used by the Chronicler of Amariah, priest of the days of

5 For the latter view, see Gunneweg, Leviten und Priester, 188. • German "Kampfprogramm"; Gunneweg, Leviten und Priester, 188. 7 Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 1128. Cf. Eichrodt, Hesekiel, 399; N. Allan, "Jerusalem Priesthood", 262. 1 Compare e.g. Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 1248; Greenberg, "Design", 208; S. Zeitlin, "Titles", 2; Lang, Kein Aufstand, 139; C. Mackay, "Why Study Ezekiel40-48?", EvQ 31 (1965) 159; G.C.M. Douglas, "Ezekiel's Temple", EI 9 (1898) 420; D. Lane, The Cloud and the Silver Lining (Welwyn 1985) 143. 9 T. Chary, Les Prophetes et le Culte a Partir de l'Exil (Tournai 1955) SO. 10 J. Bailey, "Usage of Post Restoration Period Terms Descriptive of Priest and High Priest", JBL 70 (1951) 217. 11 This is an exception to the general rule that the substantive and its adjective agree as to article. According to GKC § 126 w, however: "The article is ... not infrequently used ... with the attribute alone, when it is added to an originally indefinite substantive as a subsequent limitation".