It does not fall within the scope of this article to deal with the later developments and organiza- tion of the priestly tribe of Levi, which will be fully treated of in art. PRIESTS AND LEVITES. Besides Jg 17 and 18, 19 and 20, the only other places in pre- exilic historical books where Levites are mentioned are 1S 64, 2S 15%, 1 K 8* 1951. and all of these ap-
ear to be secondary or Deuteronomic.t+ One other important passage, however, requires mention, to complete the early account of Levi, Dt 33°"- The Blessing of Moses ‘ breathes the bright and happy spirit of the earlier narratives of the Kings,’ and may be dated shortly after the separation under Jeroboam I. By this time, then, we find that Levi has become thoroughly established as the priestly tribe, enjoying the priestly rights of administering the divine oracle and instruction (torah), and offering incense and sacrifice ; though it appears that the exclusive priesthood of the Levites was not without its opponents even at this period (Dt 33"). The Blessing describes the character of the ideal Levite by an allusion to past history when the fidelity and disinterestedness of the tribe were conspicuously proved. Though Levi is not mentioned in connexion with the events of Massah and Meribah (Ex17!-7, Nu 201-33), yet it is possible that another version of these incidents was current in which the tribe was in some way tested by Jehovah.t The other past event allnded to is that in Ex 32%-°, when the Levites distinguished themselves by remarkable disinterestedness. The reference to this occasion is, however, disputed ; for the verbs in Dt 33%e may be translated as presents and not as pasts, and the statement may be merely a penekal one. Nevertheless, the allusion to Ex 32 may be implied at the same time.
The principal authorities have been cited above. Besides these may be mentioned Graf, Geschichte des Stammes Levi in Merx, Archiv. 1867, i. 68- 106, 208-236; Edu. Meyer, Geschichte des Alter- thums, 1884, 1. 377ff.; Fr. v. Hummelauer, S.J., Das vormosaische Priesterthum in Israel, 1899.
G. A. COOKE.
LEVIATHAN (jpn Ziwyathan).—The description of leviathan (Job 41) clearly points to the crocodile (LXX δράκων). Again, the mention of leviathan (LXX δράκοντες, Ps 741%) is in the middle of an allusion to the miracles connected with the Exodus of the Israelites. Leviathan here is to be ufder- stood as the crocodile, the emblem of ‘ Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, the great dragon (tannim) that lieth in the midst of his rivers’ (Ezk 298). ‘The people inhabiting the wilderness’ (Ps, 1.6.) are the wild beasts of the desert, to which Pharaoh’s host
* Van Hoonacker notices the E i Levitical families, Phinehas, Puticl (Ex Gi)" Moses; and the unique expression about the ancestors of Eli’s family, 1S 227 ‘when they were in Egypt, servants (LXX) to the house of Pharaoh.”
+t Nowack, Heb. Archdol. ii. 91 n.
t Driver, Deuteronomy 400.
| became ἃ prey (comp. ‘people,’ ‘folk,’ Pr 30%: *).
On the other hand, leviathan of the sea (Ps 104%, LXX δράκων) cannot be the crocodile. Itis probably the whale. Whales are not rare in the Mediter- ranean, which is doubtless the ‘sea great and wide* (v.2), Parts of skeletons of two rorquals are pre- served in the Museum of the Syrian Protestant College at Beirat. One was thrown on shore near Tyre, and the other at Beirft itself. In Job 358 ‘Jeviathan’ of RV and AVm (AV ‘their mourn- ing’) is taken by most modern commentators to refer to the dragon, which in popular ΤΟ ΒΊΟΥ was believed to darken or eclipse the sun an
moon by ‘ throwing its folds round them or swallow- ing them up. Enchanters were supposed to have power to set this dragon in motion’ (Davidson, Job, 20). The same mythological allusion underlies Job 268 (see Dillmann’s note) and Is 27! (see Cheyne, ad loc.). G. E. Post.
LEVIRATE LAW.—See MARRIAGE.
LEVIS (A Λευίς, B -els), 1 Es 9. — Wrongly taken as a proper name in this book; in Ezr 10 ‘Shabbethai the Levite’ stands in place of ‘ Levis and Sabbateus.’
LEVITES.—See LEVI and PRIESTS AND LEVITES.
LEVITICUS (called by the Jews, from its open- ing word, 8771; other names found in the Mishna are 0395 na (‘Law of Priests’), ‘> 15p (‘ Book of Priests’), πξ 72D (‘Book of Offerings’), οἵ. Menach. iii. 4; Megilla, iii. 6 ; Siphra, ete. ; LXX Λευ(ε)ιτικόν (cf. Philo, Λευιτικὴ βίβλος); Vulg. Leviti- cus).—Leviticus is the third part of the sixfold work now generally known as the Hexateuch. It belongs in its entirety to the Priestly school of writers(P). For the explanation and proof of this statement see art. HEXATEUCH.
As the whole book can be ascribed to a single ‘document,’ it might seem that the literary prob- lem was a simpler one than in the case of Genesis and Exodus. In fact, however, the questions that demand solution are, though in large measure different, from, yet no less complex than, those of the earlier books. The geologist who has settled to what ‘formation’ the rocks of a district belong, has yet to investigate the composition and relative order of the perhaps dislocated and contorted strata which are comprised under the same general titie. In the art. on Exopus (§ IV.) we have already seen how documents after being separated from others may be again resolved into distinct com- ponents. The extent to which this process is carried out below may seem unwarranted, for, though many of the points are fully treated in well-known works like Kuenen’s Hex. and Driver's LOT, it has not been usual to press the analysis so far. It is, however, believed that the main lines are firmly laid on grounds that have proved generally convincing, even though details may be regarded as unsettled.