[Image]  [Hi-Res Image]

Page 279

TAXATION.

II. Ecclesiastical. The Primitive Custom (¢ 1). Rise of Taxation of Clergy (¢ 2). Feudal Principles Applied (¢ 3). Development from the Fourteenth C,enBuTy (¢ 4). Present System (§ 5).

I. Hebrew: The Hebrew language has no general term for taxes. Dues collected for the temple, priests, and sacred purposes in general are designated by terurnah, " oblation," " offering," " heave offering "). The first-born, the first-

r. For fruits, and the Tithes (q.v.), which Sacred belonged to Yahweh as Israel's king, Purposes. may be considered the first class of such sacred taxes. In II Kings xii. 412, xxii. 3-7 mention is made of money paid into the temple treasury, which consisted in part of " the money imposed by estimation," i.e., of the tax fixed by law for the redemption of persons devoted to God by a vow (Lev. xxvii. 1-13), and in part of voluntary contributions. Ex. xxx. 11-16 (P) treats of a tax for the regular service, and this Mosaic legislation was used in later time to justify the assessments necessary for the sanctuary (cf. II Chron. xxiv. 6, 9); the revenue thus derived was to be used for the temple service, but not for the building of the sanctuary. The sum imposed upon " every one that paaseth among them that are numbered " was " half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary "; rich and poor were taxed alike (verse 15). The post-exilic period developed from this single poll-tax an annual temple-tax. Under Nehemiah the community agreed to an annual contribution of one-third of a shekel for the service of the house of God (Neh. x. 32; cf. Ezra vi. 9; I Macc. x. 39-41; II Mace. iii.). The money current at this time was the Babylonian silver coinage, in which the shekel was divided into thirds. In the time of the Maccabees Phenician money was introduced, which divided the shekel into halves, and the temple tax was then half a shekel, i.e., a double drachma (Matt. xvii. 24, 27). Since Exodus xxx. 13 required payment in the ancient sacred coinage, money-changers found entrance into the temple (Matt. xxi. 12). Jews living outside of Palestine also sent the temple tax to Jerusalem after they became twenty years of age (Mishna, Shekalim, iii.-iv.; Josephus, Ant., XVIIL, ix. 1).

Of secular tributes the tenth is mentioned as one of the royal privileges in the address which is put into the mouth of Samuel when the Israelites asked for a king (I Sam. viii. 10-18). From this it has been inferred that such a tax was known to the

that the taxation of families which is implied in

I Sam. xvii. 25 refers to the tenth.

2. For The mention of " king's mowings "

Secular (Amos vii. 1) points to a claim of the

Purposes. king upon the first cutting of cultivated

crops suitable for fodder for his horses

(I Kings xviii. 5). From I Kings iv. 7-19, although

the text is corrupt, the following may be inferred

concerning tribute at the time of Solomon: all Israel

was divided into twelve districts, each of which

was under a governor; on the basis of this division

the corv6e was arranged (I Kings v. 13-18; cf. xi.

28), and the burdens of taxation were fixed. That

the latter intended payment in kind is evident from

I Kings iv. 7, where it is said that each of these

governors provided food for the king and his house

hold, each man his month in a year. The other

revenues of Solomon were derived from his expedi

tions to Ophir (I Kings ix. 28, x. 22), with which

an export trade was probably connected; from the

trade in horses, which were bought in Egypt and

sold to the kings of the Hittites and of Syria (I

Kings x. 28-29); and from the imposts collected

from the caravans passing through his kingdom to

Phenicia (I Kings x. 15). All these taxes were en

tirely new and were necessitated by Solomon's

splendid court, as may be seen from the fact that

upon his death the people complained of the bur

dens as something unusual. His predecessors had

probably no need to levy such tribute. Saul main

tained no costly court. In the time of David rev

enues derived from tributes of homage and justice

had probably greatly increased. At any rate,

David's property had become considerable, and,

according to I Chron. xxvii. 25-34 (cf. II Chron.

xxvi. 10), he owned crown lands of large extent.

Added to this were the rich spoils of war (II Sam.

viii. 11-12, xii. 30), and the regular tributes of the

subjugated nations (II Sam. viii. 2; cf. I Kings v.

1; II Kings iii.). It is probable that the census by

David (II Sam. xxiv.) was intended to serve as a

basis for taxation, on which account evil results

were expected from the innovation. The tax sys

tems were most likely the same under the kings of

the two kingdoms as under Solomon. According to

I Kings xxi. 1-16, the crown demains seem to have

been increased by confiscating in certain cases the

property of those who were condemned; I Sam.

viii. 12 also implies real estate over which the king

could appoint his officers (cf. Ezek. xlvi. 17). But

there is no mention of land tax in the time of the

divided kingdom, and a poll-tax (which is not men

tioned in the description of the royal privileges,

I Sam. viii. 10-18) was exacted only in extraordi

nary cases, as when a war-contribution was to be

paid to foreign despots (II Kings xv. 20, xxiii. 35).

In the post-exilic period, the Jews as subjects of the

Persian kingdom had to pay customs, " tolls," and

" tributes," no doubt a direct money-tax and prob

ably a capitation-tax (Ezra iv. 13, 20, vi. 8; Neh.

v. 4); the priests and temple-attendants were ex

empt (Ezra vii. 24). Owing to the bitter feeling of

servitude (Neh. ix. 36-37) the burden of taxation

seemed harder than it ieally was; yet the Persian

governors occasionally practised extortion (Neh. v.