These are the only passages where we can look for explicit references in JE. But there are, besides, the notices of Israel’s oft-repeated request for per- mission to go forth and celebrate a feast in the wilderness of Sinai (Ex 318 716 8.255. 10° et passim). These indicate the existence at this period of a festival that may in some way be related to the Passover. We return to this question later on (ii. 6).
2. Deuteronomy.—Here in 1018 we have the earliest undisputed explicit reference to our feast and use of the word Passover (cf. above, and Wellh. Proleg.* 84n.). Its observance, we are told, falls in the month of Abib, the month of ears (cf. Ex 134 23 3418), which is the older name for Nisan (Mar.-Apr.), because in this month J” brought them out of Egypt at night. At this season they are to sacrifice to J” the Passover, consisting of sheep and cattle, at the place which He may choose for His worship. With the sacrificial meal and during seven days they are to eat only unleavened bread. This is the bread of affliction, because of the trepidation with which they came forth from Egypt. So are they to be ever reminded of that anxious day. During the seven days no leaven is to be allowed to remain within Israel's borders, and of the offerings of the first day none of the flesh is to be permitted to remain until the morning (ef. Ex 2318 34%). The Passover may not be sacrificed at one’s dwelling-place, but only at that place which J” shall choose for His worship. There at the setting of the sun, at the time when they came forth from Egypt, it shall be sacrificed. Six days shall οΊθ γε ζῇ bread be eaten, and on the seventh there shall be a festal gathering to J”, and no work shall be done.
As com with other legislation, four points are especially noteworthy. (a) Instead of merely introducing mazzéth(P), the Passover here becomes an eel τὶ of it, i.e. the Passover day becomes
It is striking that so
the first day of that feast. much attention should be paid in these eight verses to this one ordinance, and so little to the further
regulations. The explanation may be that the centralization of all worship in one sanctuary, which is the novel and most important feature of Deuteronomic legislation, especially affected the Passover, and so required more explicit formulation (cf. Nowack, Arch, ii. p. 153). But even then other difficulties still remain, and it may be reason- ably doubted whether the section stands at present in its original form. Vvy.**~» seem an interpolation into the connected account contained in vv.’ 3 and 5-7 (wx77 ον in v.4 would then, of course, be a later addition). V.8, which makes further mention of mazz6th, seems incongruous in suddenly speaking of six days when seven were named before (ν.). The stated assembly (ny) recalls the priestly legislation, and contradicts the preceding command to return home on the following morning. So it seems probable that this apparent blending of the two feasts comes from reconstruction by a writer of later date than the Deuteronomist.* (δ) It is
“ΟἹ. Steue el, ‘Deut.’ in Mandkom. He assigns the Passover to J and mazyéth to E, and considers all references to mazzoth here as later additions after the union of J and E, te, makes RJ® later than D; cf. Bertholet in Kurzer Handcom, ; Cornill, Findeit. p. 25, regards νυ, 5. 4as an interpolation correct- ing v.8; Stade, Geach. i. 658, thinks vv.14 and δ are irrecon- ble doublets. In support of this, cf. Holzinger, Hex. p. 399.
PASSOVER
expressly stated and strongly emphasized that the Passover is not to be observed as a domestic rite in the individual homes, but at the temple in Jeru- salem (vv.**7), But this does not mean, as we see, that it is to take the form of a general offering for all (so Ezk), but that it is rather made up o the private individual sacrifices (ef. Wellh. Pro: eg.* p. 89). (c) The offering is not limited to a lamb (Ex 12), but may be taken from the flock or the herd (v.2). To explain this statement in the light of later usage, i.e. as referring to the private sacri- fices alluded to in 2Ch (30%-% 357%), the later hagigah (a13n), or peace-oflerings, does violence to the text. This would mean the mention of a detail, and silence regarding the all-important feature. Furthermore, the use of the sing. in νν. δ" Τ shows that the writer has in his mind the sacrifice on the Passover evening.* (d) Another point to be noted is the manner of preparing the Passover sacrifice. It is to be boiled (v.7).+ The OT allusions seem to poink to this as an early method of preparing sacri-
ce (Jg 64%, 1 § 25-15; and cf. Ex 23! 34%, Dt 14%), and some think that this was gradually replaced by the more refined mode of roasting (cf. Benzinger, Arch. 435, 451; Wellh. Proleg.* p. 68). The pro- hibition of the use of leavened bread is found in the three great codes of the Pent., buat nowhere else is it called the bread of affliction (sy ond). We can compare this with the account in Ex 12% % (JE), which is suggested by the expression ‘in trepida- tion’ (ppna Ex 12"),