insecure a basis. Knobel remarks on Lev. offering (see Lev. vi. 25-29; vii. 6: Numb. xxi. 1-4 that "among the Greeks, priests xviii. 9, 10), and the tre■paBB (or, guiU) and priestesses remained at a distance from offering (comp. Lev. vii. 28-38), and every funerals (Pie.to, 'De Legg.,' xii. p. 947): dedioated (or, devoted) thing in Israel (see while nmong the Romans ought the Flamen Lev. xxvii. 21; Numb. xviii. 14). The burnt dialis to touch no corpse (Gell., x. 15), the offering is omitted, been.use it we.s entirely augur perform no funeral rites (Tacit., consumed upon the e.lte.r, with the exception • Ann.,' i. 31), and the pontifex accompany of the hide or skin, whioh under the Law be- no funeral procession (Dio Cass., lvi. 31): came a perquisite of the officiating priest not et all should he behold a dead body (Lev. vii. 8). That Ezekiel is silent a.bout (Sen·.,' Ad .2En.,' vi. 176), and in oese he had this, while the requirement of Lev. vii. 80, ooca.sion to pronounce a funeral oration, a that the priest should obtain the breast curtain should hang between him and the with the right shoulder of every fire offering, corpse." As to the cleansing of e. defiled goes beyond the prescription of Dent. xviii. priest, that should be conducted in e.ccord- 8, that the shoulder, two cheeks, and the ance with the cust.omary regulations (comp. maw should he the priest's portion, is Numb. xix.), with thlsditference-that on the rege.rded by Wellhe.nsen and Smend as a termination of the ordinary rites, which ex- proof tbe.t Ezekiel stands between Deutero- tended over seven days, an additional seven nomy and the priest-code. But as Ezekiel days, according to Haveruick and Keil does not condescend upon the particnle.r (though Hengstenberg and Plumptre de- parts which should be reserved from the fire cide for only one hepte.de), should elapse. offerings, it is impossible to say whether he at the end of which, on the presentation of held with the Deuteronomist or the writer of a sin offering, he should be restored to the priest-code, supposing them to ha dif- 11ervice in the inner sanctuary. ferent: e.nd,inasmuch os Lev. vii. 30 speaks Vers. 28-31 state the emoluments which of an offering by fire that was first paid to Jehovah and by him afterwards handed should be enjoyed by the priests. over to Aaron and his sons, while Dent. Ver. 28.-The Authorized Version con- xviii. 3 treats of the dues which should be veys the impression that the first portion of pa.id by the people directly to the priests, the priests' snstenance shonld be derived it is olee.r that both practices may have from the sin offering, which is not mentioned existed together instead of the one (the till the following verse. And it shall be former) coming in as an advance upon the llll.to them for e.n inheritance ought rather other (the latter): see Keil on Deut. xviii. 8. to be rendered. an4 there shall be to them Ver. 30.-A further portion of the priests' (what shall be) for an inheritance; or more emoluments is stated as the first of all the simply, and they shall ha'Oe an inheritance firstfrnits of all things-or, of everything (Revised Version), whicb,it is next declared, (Revised Version), as e.g. of corn, oil, must, as in the Law (N nmb. xvili. 20 : Dent. x. 9 ; and wool-and every oblation (n~1,1;1)-or, :rviii. 1, 2), should be Jehovah, and not any heave offering-of all-or, of everytiiing- territorial possession or tribal tre.ct such as with the first of the people's dough; or, should be assigned to the other tribes (see coarse meal; which a.gain re-cohoes the pro- eh. xlviii.). Smend thinks Ezekiel we.a visions of the Law, the first of the flrstfruits scarcely e.ccnre.te in describing the priests being specified in Exorl. xxiii. 19; xxxiv. RB landless in tbe sense intended by the 26; N nmb. :xviii. 13 ; Deut. xvi ii. 4 ; the Deuteronomist and the priest-code, since in oblation, or terumah (Hebrew), in Numb. eh. xlv. 4 they are, after e.ll, furnished with xv. 19; xviii. 19; and the dough, or coarse a plot of ground on which to build their meal, or groats, in Numb. xv. 20, 21. Eze- houses e.nd erect their sanctuary ; whilst kiel's supposed (Wellha.usen,Smenu) silence Wellbausen (' Geschichte Isr1<els,' p. 165) as regards the firetlings of ca.ttle, which in holds the priest-code to have somewhat the book of the covenant (Exod. :xxii. 29) romanced in adopting the same language e.nd in the Deuteronomist (Deut. xv. 19) are about the Ae.ronides and Levites, since, if to be ea.ten by the offerer, but iu the priest- they really did obtain forty-eight cities, code (Numb.xviii. 21) belong to the priests, "what were these if not e. lot e.nd a land is imo.ginary. The first of e.ll the firHtfruits tract, and that too e. comparatively great of everything cannot surely mean of every• ond important one?" Neither view stands thing except cattle. If Ezekiel does not in need of refutation. give the tenths of the tithes to the priests, Ver. 29.-To the priests should be allo• be still D.BBigns them to the sanctuary (see ooted, in addition, what already he.d been eh. xlv. 14). e.asigned them by the Law for their support, Ver. 81.-Tbe commo.ndment of the Mo- the meat (or, meal) offering, consisting of saic Law is here renewed o.gainst ea.ting the fi?ur, corn, or bread (comp. Lev. ii. 1-16; flesh of any fow I or beast that hod either vi. 161 Numb. nviii. 12, 13), and the sin died a natural death or been mo.ngled in oR,xLtv, 1-81.] THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. 893
the killing (oomp. Lev. :nit. 15: xxii. B)- equally binding upon all (Exod. XL 81; a oommo.ndment whioh, while enjoined speci- Dent. xiv. 21). ally upon the priests (Lev. xxii. 8), was