When we compare the condition of the Jews immediately after the Exile with that which pre- vailed in the time of Christ, a very important difference, as was above remarked, presents itself. Instead of the small, poverty-stricken population of Nehemiah’s day, we see a numerous people, which with energy and industry can turn to good account the many sources of wealth that abound
* Jos. Ant. Iv. viii. 28 ; cf. Saalschiitz, Mosaisches Recht, 713.
+ Saalschiitz, Z.c. 817.
t With these foreign slaves they had generally, according to the Talmud, a great deal of trouble; cf. Zadok Kahn, L’esclav- age selon la Bible et le Talmud, 1867, p.173f. For an earlier period, cf. Sir 3324,
in their land. In spite of their longing for Messi- anic times, in spite of the unreality of their world ot ideas, they displayed in real life much adroit- ness and a remarkable turn for business, so that their position had come to be one of great material well-being. The clearest evidence of their extra- ordinary energy is afforded by the circumstance that, although they were very heavily burdened with taxes, they were not reduced to poverty, but on the contrary continued to increase in wealth. The dues they had to pay were partly sacred and partly secular. The former were based upon the enactments of the Priests’ Code (esp. Ly 2° 616-18 [Heb. *1] 75234, Nu 18828), with which certain prescriptions from Deuteronomy (142-” 18!-8)* were combined. The principal due was the Levites’ tenth of all the produce of the soil, in the paying of which the most painful exactness was shown by strict Jews (cf. Mt 23%). But before the tithing of the produce of the soil there was a twofold due deducted: the first-fruits of the ‘seven kinds’ (see Schiirer, GJV® ii. 249), viz. barley, wheat, grapes, figs, pomegranates, olives, and honey ; and the ¢éréima, which was not exactly measured, but was understood to be the fiftieth part (see Schiirer, l.c. 249 f.) of all the fruit of field and tree. From the products which were then tithed there was taken (in addition to the tenth part paid to the priestly tribe) a second tenth,} which, however, was destined, along with the tenth of cattle (Ly 27%), for sacrificial feasts. But every three years a third tenth (the »y rwyn, the ‘ poor-tithe,’ according to the Rabb. interpretation of Dt 142 ; but see Driver, /.c. 170n.) was deducted for the benefit of the poor. Further, the firstlings of all animals that might be offered in sacrifice were claimed as a due, while a sum of money had to be paid for firstborn children and the firstlings of unclean animals (Nu 18¥-!7); not to speak of a firstlings’ cake (the halla) of coarse flour (Nu 15°, ef. Ro 11°), and a part of the wool at the first shearing (Dt 184). Lastly, there were various occasional offerings that required to be brought. The annual temple poll-tax (Ex 30, Mt 17%), on the other hand, was not high (half a shekel for every adult male), and could not be felt except by the very poorest. See more fully, on the subject of this paragraph, Schiirer, GJV* ii. 243-262 [HJP Il. i, 230-254].
In addition to these very considerable dues,t there were the secular taxes. After the Jews were freed from the Greek domination, which, from a financial point of view, was very burden- some, requiring a third part of grain and half the produce of fruit trees to be paid, the taxes passed to the Hasmonzans.¢ When Herod afterwards became king, he obtained conmand of all the secular taxes of the country. According to Jos- ephus (Ant. XV. ix. 1), these consisted mainly in the rendering of a certain proportion of the pro- duce of the land, besides which the king levied a market toll on all that was sold in Jerusalem (id. XVII. viii. 4). Herod’s whole revenue, according to Ant. XVII. xi. 4 (with which, indeed, BJ um. vi. 3 does not agree), amounted to more than 900 talents (=£369,000) a year. The Jews com- plained bitterly of the amount of the taxes laid
* On the irreconcilable conflict between these codes in certain particulars, see Driver, Deut. 169f., 218 ff. ;
t Following the Rabb. interpretation of Dt 1422-27, which held the tithe here prescribed to be distinct from, and in addition to, the tithe of Nu 181-28; but see Driver, /.c. 169f.; Schirer, 7.c. 246; and art. Trrum in vol. iv. p. 730.
{ In the Sabbatical years all dues based upon the produce of the soil would of course be dispensed with (cf. Jos. Ant. xvil. nh bade their system of taxing we know nothing except the few details contained in Josephus (Ant. xv. x. 63 cf. Schirer, G/V i. 345), The people felt the taxation of Herod to be heavy in comparison with what had gone before (Jos. ib. XV. xi, 2).
52 NEW TESTAMENT TIMES
upon them, and alleged that it was only by bribing the king himself and his tax-collectors that it was possible to save oneself from injustice (Amt. XVII. xi. 2, cf, viii. 4). But of course we are not to lend too much credit to these complaints, especially as we learn that, after the great famine, Herod voluntarily granted the people remission of a third of the taxes (Ant. xv. x. 4). Herod’s successors no doubt organized the matter of taxation upon the same lines as himself. Herod Antipas, who derived from his territories an annual revenue of 200 talents, had customs officials stationed on the frontiers (Mt 9°), to levy duties on imports and possibly also on exports. Agrippa, too, who for a short time had the whole land under his sway, would probably utilize the system of his prede- cessor. But during his reign not only was the market toll at Jerusalem abolished (see below), but the king, who was anxious to gain the affec- tions of the Jews, remitted also the duty upon the houses of the capital (Ané. XIx. vi. 3). During the period that intervened between the deposition of Archelaus and the accession of Agrippa 1., Judeea,* and, after Agrippa’s death, the whole country, was taxed by the Romans, and the revenues passed into the Imperial jiscus (cf. Mt 2271), The taxes proper were levied by the Pro- curator, the commercial imposts. were farmed out to private officials. The taxes consisted partly of a proportion of the produce of the soil, which was paid either in kind or in money, but they included also a poll-tax, which was levied even on women and slaves. Vitellius remitted to the Jews the market toll that had to be paid at Jerusalem (Ant. XVIII. iv. 3); but in spite of this the taxes were very high, and were felt by the people to be ex- tremely oppressive (Tac. Ann. ii. 42).