John Sietze Bergsma, «The Jubilee: A Post-Exilic Priestly Attempt to Reclaim Lands?», Vol. 84 (2003) 225-246

The article examines the hypothesis that the jubilee legislation of Lev 25 was a post-exilic attempt on the part of returning Judean exiles — particularly the priests — to provide legal justification for the reclamation of their former lands. This hypothesis is found to be dubious because (1) the jubilee did not serve the interests of the socio-economic classes that were exiled, and (2) Lev 25 does not show signs of having been redacted with the post-exilic situation in mind. A comparison with Ezekiel’s vision of restoration points out the differences between Lev 25 and actual priestly land legislation for the post-exilic period.

        Of course, the accuracy and agenda of the deuteronomistic historian and the redactor of Jeremiah have been challenged²⁹, but these challenges do not effect the present argument, since — at least to our knowledge — no one disputes the fact that the deportees consisted of the urban upper classes, i.e. those who would pose a potential political threat to Babylonian rule³⁰. This is congruent with known Babylonian policy. As Martin Noth describes it,

After the old upper class in Jerusalem and Judah had been taken away in 598 B.C., mainly the urban population of Jerusalem was deported [in 587 B.C.], presumably again to Babylonia. The peasant population, on the other hand, remained where they were³¹.

        The urban character of the exiled population is hard to reconcile with the exception of urban property from the jubilee laws, if the legislation was produced or redacted to benefit them. Lev 25,29-34 excludes the sale of houses within cities from the release of the jubilee, with the exception of levitical property in levitical cities, which Jerusalem was not (cf. 1 Chr 6,34-66). Why would the returning "priests" specifically forbid to themselves and the other exiles the opportunity to recover their urban residences? Why does the exception for levitical property not include Jerusalem? This is particularly ironic, given the fact that a large number of the exiles were Jerusalemites.

        In sum, the problem for the "land-reclamation" hypothesis is this: "the purpose of the jubilee seems to have been to preserve the economic integrity of the peasant farmer"³² the very segment of the population not exiled. The exiles were the urban elite who benefited from the system of latifundism expressly opposed by the jubilee³³. How then is the jubilee legislation a product or redaction of the