Charles Ellicott Commentary Leviticus 27:16

Charles Ellicott Commentary

Leviticus 27:16

1819–1905
Anglican
Charles Ellicott
Charles Ellicott

Charles Ellicott Commentary

Leviticus 27:16

1819–1905
Anglican
SCRIPTURE

"And if a man shall sanctify unto Jehovah part of the field of his possession, then thy estimation shall be according to the sowing thereof: the sowing of a homer of barley [shall be valued] at fifty shekels of silver." — Leviticus 27:16 (ASV)

Some part of a field of his possession. — That is, if he consecrates by a vow to the service of the sanctuary a portion of a field which he inherits from his forefathers. This field, therefore, constitutes a part of his inalienable patrimony, thus distinguishing it from a field which he has acquired by his own purchase. (See Leviticus 27:22.) The words some part, which are italicized, are implied in the Hebrew construction of these words. No one was allowed to vow the whole of his estates to the sanctuary, as he would thereby impoverish his own family.

Thy estimation shall be according to the seed thereof. — Better, your estimation shall be according to its seed; that is, he is not to part with the field thus vowed for the sanctuary, but the priest is to value the area according to the quantity of seed required for sowing it.

An homer of barley seed shall be valued at fifty shekels of silver. — That is, if the piece of land which he vowed could properly be cropped with one homer, or five and a half bushels of barley seed, he is to value it at £6 9s. 2d. (See Leviticus 27:3.) According to the authorities during the Second Temple, these fifty shekels covered the value of the produce for the whole period of forty-nine years, that is, from one jubilee year to another, so that a plot of land of the dimensions here described was estimated at a little more than one shekel per annum.

The person who made the vow could, under these circumstances, always redeem it, as it would almost amount to a gift to let any stranger buy it at this price. The low value put upon it was evidently designed not to deprive the family of their means of subsistence, since the patrimonial estates were almost always the only source of their livelihood.