LEVITI (Hebr. lēwī, plur. lēwījīm; Gr. lēwījī, plur. -ai). — A professional designation for those engaged in subordinate Jewish worship under the priests, Levi (v.), which was distinguished into the three subtribes of Gerson, Caath, Merari (v.).
Descendants of Caath were Mosè (v.) Aronne (v.), whose family was reserved for the priesthood. Other families became prominent in the time of David. They are dealt with especially in the books of Numeri, Paralipomeni, Esdra, and Neemia.
In the Mosaic age, the history of the tribe begins with the adherence of the “sons of Levi” to Mosè, who had come down from the mountain and protested against the establishment of the golden calf by breaking the tablets of the law; they were charged with carrying out the punitive slaughter among the other tribes (Ex. 32, 26-29). This fidelity to Yahweh earned them the honorable privilege of being consecrated to divine worship.
Hence also the praise in the “blessing of Mosè” (Deut. 33, 9), which some, however (F. Hummelauer, Comm. in Num., Paris 1899, p. 168 ff.), hypothetically refer to the fidelity that Levi alone among all the tribes, in its entirety, would have shown toward Mosè at the time of the general defection during the period of Cades.
The connection once made between “Levi” and lw and lw't, the name of priests and priestesses of the god Wadd in Minaean inscriptions found at el-‘Ulā in the Midianite region, is without foundation (cf. E. König, Geschichte der altt. Religion, Gütersloh 1923, p. 270, note 2), given the late date of the texts themselves. Even less attention does the hypothesis deserve that the Mosaic history began at a sanctuary south of Palestine, for example at Cades (gādhet, “sanctuary”), where a certain Mosè, a Midianite priest, with other colleagues “l.”, supposedly organized a group of nomads (the Israelites), becoming their leader.
At the holocaust offered by Mosè in the ratification of the Sinaitic covenant, the young firstborn served with him as representatives of the “priestly people” (Ex. 24, 5), perhaps assisting the priests, who are not named here but seem already to have existed (Ex. 19, 22-24). They were subsequently replaced in these functions (cf. Num. 3, 12-13; hence the prescriptions concerning the “redemption” in Num. 3, 40-51; cf. vv. 14-39) by members of the Levitical tribe (Num. 2-3), which had already supplied the priests through the family of Aronne (Ex. 28-29; cf. Lev. 8-9) and to which Mosè himself belonged.
The “curse” of the tribal ancestor (Gen. 49, 5-7) was expiated through religious zeal and replaced (thus also R. Kittel, Die Religion des Folkes Itr., Leipzig 1921, pp. 39, 44) by Mosaic rehabilitation (Deut. 33, 8-11). Jacob’s saying is of exceptional importance because of its undoubted authenticity (which therefore proves the existence of Levi before the priesthood): in the age of full Levitical prestige, that is, after Mosè, it could neither have been composed nor transmitted. In Deut. 14, 29 the L. are named together with foreigners, because that passage concerns the beneficiaries of the tithes: orphans, widows, and the destitute in general. On the hypothesis that the L. were individuals chosen from all the tribes, neither the name Levi nor the particular connection with Simeone (Gen. 34; 49, 5) can be explained. It is therefore entirely impossible to say (W. O. E. Oesterley–E. H. Robinson, Hebrew Religion, London 1937, p. 164) that it is uncertain whether “Levite” was originally nomen gentis or nomen officii.
Their initiation took place through rites (Ex. 29; cf. Ex. 40; Lev. 8-9; 21), which subsequently remained traditional and included especially the laying on of hands (Num. 8, 6-15). In the first census they numbered 8580 (ibid. 4, 48). The three groups, Gersonites, Caathites, and Merarites, were assigned specialized functions and particular positions near the Ark during the march and in the encampment (Ex. 3).
Service began at the age of 25 (Num. 8, 24), but only from the age of 30 did it include heavy work, such as carrying the Ark (ibid. 4, 3, 47), and it lasted until the age of 50. There is no evidence that they then had special garments. They were not counted among the combatants (ibid. 2, 33).
In the division of the Promised Land they did not receive a region of their own, but cities with a little pastureland, exactly forty-eight (ibid. 35, 7), among all the other tribes (ibid. 35, 1-8; Ios. 21, 2 ff.); the whole people was to provide for their sustenance with a portion of the spoils of war
(Num. 31, 30) and with the tithes (ibid. 18, 21-24; cf. Lev. 27, 30). In Deut. 12, 19; 14, 27, etc., the people are exhorted not to let them lack what was necessary. The L. in turn owed a tithe to the priests (Num. 18, 20-32; Neh. 10, 38-39). The episode of Iud. 17, 7-12 echoes certain uncertainties in the primitive Levitical and priestly organization.
David, in his general reform of the religious institutions, also defined the functions of the L., who had meanwhile greatly increased in number: in the census that the king conducted in his old age, the L. numbered 30,000 (I Par. 23, 28-31).
During the transfer of the Ark to the Davidic tent (ibid. 15, 2), the L., who also attended to the music, were dressed like the king in a “robe of fine linen” (ibid. 15, 27). David organized the services of the various subtribes (ibid. 23, 6-23), always subordinate to the “sons of Aronne” (ibid. 28; cf. 27), lowering the age of entry into service to 20 (ibid. 27). Their functions were specified in many ways: alongside the L. in general, particular importance was given to the musicians (ibid. 25) and the gatekeepers (ibid. 26), but there were many other offices (ibid. 26, 20 ff.). The musicians, numbering 288 (ibid. 25, 7; cf. 23, 5), belonged to the families of Asaph, Heman, and Idithun, who are also mentioned as authors of psalms (Ps. 50, 62, 73-83, 88; cf. 89). At the time of the apostasy of the north, the L. once again demonstrated their Yahwistic fidelity and were consequently expelled by Teroboam (II Par. 11, 13-14; 13, 9; I Reg. 12, 21); the descendants of certain priests who on that occasion and in the following decades had adapted themselves to idolatry were later degraded to simple L. (Ez. 44, 10-14; ibid. 48, 13) — the errant are simply called L. In the time of the subsequent rulers, the L. also appear in other functions: as teachers of religion to the people (II Par. 17, 8), in charge of collections (ibid. 24, 4-6), of stores of provisions (ibid. 31, 12), and of repairs to the Temple (ibid. 34, 12). In the future religious order outlined by Ezechiele, the L. are strongly recalled to their functions in subordination to the priests (Ez. 44, 10-11). In the context of Ezechiele, a reproachful tone toward the L. in comparison with the priests of the line of Sadoc can be perceived; alongside this observation should be placed that concerning the small number of L. who returned from exile (about 350; Esd. 2, 41-42; Neh. 7, 45, 56; cf. Esd. 8, 15-19), in comparison with the priests (about 4300; Esd. 2, 36-39), who were more ardent in Yahwistic and nationalistic spirit (although among them too, as among the L., a considerable number were guilty of contracting mixed marriages: Esd. 9, 1; 10, 5, 23). The returning L. settled partly in Jerusalem (cf. the episode of Neh. 13, 10-11, 30), while others dispersed among other cities (ibid. 7, 72). They remained essentially divided into the classes “L., musicians, gatekeepers” (Esd. 5, 70; Neh. 7, 73; 12, 46) and employed in various minor services (Neh. 11, 46), in instruction (ibid. 8, 9), etc.; they also collaborated in the material reconstruction of the city (ibid. 3, 17). As ministers of the sanctuary of subordinate rank, with ancient privileges (for example, exemption from taxes: Fl. Giuseppe, Antiq. Iud., 12, 3, 3) and new ones (for example, the wearing of linen garments like the priests: ibid., 20, 9, 6-7), and engaged in various occupations (judges: ibid., 4, 8, 14, etc.), they remained in later periods down to the New Testament (Lc. 10, 32; Io. 1, 19; Act. 4, 36), with various complications in the Talmudic legal and ceremonial order.
In Judaism, the expectation was sometimes expressed of the Messiah as a priest from the tribe of Levi (Test. Levi, 18; Test. Iudae, 25; Ass. Moysti, 9, 1).