These passages are principally interesting as showing how the Hellenistic Jews w ho translated the OT, and who wrote Juditli, connected in thought the riphatm of their scriptures with the dim and mighty figures of the Greek mythological legends. See Rephaim, Giant. W. J. Beecher.
TITHE (-iff^c, SeicdTT!). — The payment of tithe is a practice both ancient and Avidespread, being found among many peoples, Semitic and non- Semitic. The choice of a tenth as the portion due to God was dictated by obvious considerations. Tlie history of the tithe in Israel is in many resnects obscure. In the strange, and probably late, docu- ment, Gn 14, we read tliat Abraham paid tithes of the spoil to Mekhizedctc ; and Jacob at Bethel makes a conditional vow to nav God a tenth of all that He gives to him (Gn 28- E). But these narra- tives cannot be taken as evidence for jiatriarchal times. Tlie latter is one of several which carry back the practice of the narrator's own time to an origin in the patriarchal age, and is ilhistrated by Am 4', which shows that tithes were paid at some of the N. Isr. sanctuaries in the reign of Jeroboam 11. (see Driver, adluc). It is accordingly remark- able that no reference is make to titlies in the Bk of the Covenant. This is usually explained on the theory that the titlies were criginallj- identical with the lirst-fruits, and that the need of more strictly defining the amount that should be paid, led, in the later legislation, to the use of the term which had already been employed in the N. Isr. sanctuaries. W. R. Smith, on the contrary, thinks that the tithe was a fixed tribute, comparatively modem in its origin. At an earlier period the tribute took the form of first-fruits, which were a private otlcring. When this was no longer adequate to meet the expenses of a more elaborate ctiltus, the tithe was charged as a fixed burden on land. We know from 1 S 8" that a tithe was paid to the king, and, if he devoted this to the support of the royal sanctuaries, the transition to a tithe paid by
the farmers directly to the sanctuaries is readily accounted for. Unlike the first-fruits, the tilhu was used to pro\ide the public banquets at sacrei festivals (see W. R. Smith, RS'^ 245-254). The later legislation and practice were as follows : —
(a) In Deuteronomy. — In 14--''"it is enacted that each year the produce of the soil should be tithed, and the tithe taken to the central sancttiary and there eaten ; or, if this be inconvenient by reason of distance, it may be turned into money, which must be spent on a sacrificial banquet at the central sanctuary. To this the Levite, since he has no portion, is to be invited. It must be noticed that the tithe is not used for public feasting, but is to be consumed by the farmer and his household. This regulation may be a reform due to the fact that in earlier times the ruling classes, while not furnishing the provisions for the feast, secured the best for themselves. Further, the tithe is not used for the support of the priesthood or the temple ser\'ices. The Levite has a moral claim to a share in the banquet, but it rests with the farmer him- self whether this is recognized. In the following verses (14-*- ^) and in 26'-'^^ it is enacted that every third year, called the year of tithing, all the tithe shall be laid up in the towns and distributed to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow. It is generally agreed that Deuteronomy does not contemplate two tithes, — one to be consumed each year, including the third, at the central sanctuary, and the other to be levied for charity every third year, — but rather a different destination for the same tithe, so that in the third year it shall be kept at home and devoted exclusively to charity. The origin of this regulation is perhaps to be found in the abolition of the old public banquets, and con- sequent necessity that some other provision shoidd be made for the poor. Since there would be no tithe in the Sabbatical year, when the land lay fallow, the year of tithing would probably coincide w ith the tlurd and sixth years in each cycle of seven years. The question remains whether the tithe in Deuteronomy is to be identified with the first-fruits. In favour of this view it may be urged that it is not probable that a double tribute should be exacted from the crops, and that the close con- nexion of the law of first-fruits with that of tithes in Dt 26'"^' shows that the two are really identical. The basket of first-fruits presented to the priest must be assumed in that case to be a portion of the first-fruits taken from the tithe. 'The command to ' rejoice in all the good which J" thy God hatli given unto thee,' implies that a feast followed the presentation of the basket of first-fruits, and this would correspond to the banquet on the tithe enjoined 14--"". The introduction of the term ' tithe ' will then have been due to the necessity of fixing with precision the amount of the first-fruits. On the other hand, IS* ordains that the first-fruita sliall be given to the priest, but this was certainly not the case with the tithe. And the feast referred to in 26" may not have been a feast on the lirst- fruits. It is difficult to decide between the two views, but it seems safer on account of 18* (which would otherwise have to be regarded as proV)ably later) to distinguish between the tithe and the first-fruits. Tlie objection based on the improba- bility that a double tribute would be exacted, falls to the ground if the first-fruits consisted merely of the basket of fruit, etc., presented at the central sanctuary.