Cities of Refuge

Within the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament there is a provision for six cities of refuge (“cities of intaking” [ערי מקלט]), where someone who has unintentionally committed murder can go and not be subject to blood revenge (Exodus 20:12–14; Numbers 35:9–28; Deuteronomy 4:41–43, 19:1–13; Joshua 20; 1 Chronicles 6). This practice has been described as refuge, asylum, and sanctuary, and the cities have been given all three of these labels, which has resulted in differing understandings of the intention of these cities. The basic legal issue is the distinction between intentional and unintentional killing. For most societies in the ancient Near East, including ancient Israel, the idea of “blood revenge” (an “eye for an eye”; lex talionis) was the way in which the killing of a member of your clan or family was avenged (Exodus 21:23). The distinction made in association with the cities of refuge/asylum was how to deal with an individual who accidentally, without intention, killed another (Exodus 21:12–14; Number 35:16–28). Also associated with this idea is the nature of sanctuary or asylum that one can obtain when one reaches a cultic center with an altar (1 Kings 1:50–53; 2:23–24). One should also note that all the cities of refuge are also Levitical Cities (1 Chronicles 6), but it is not clear what the role of the Levites was in such a city of refuge. Among the issues associated with these cities are the following: Did they actually exist, or were they simply a fiction created at a later period of time? If they were real, what was their historical context? Was it premonarchic, the time of David and Solomon, related to the centralization of Josiah, or postexilic? When were the texts composed (a question associated with the previous issue and raising wonderings about different hands in the composition of the texts associated with the idea of asylum cities)? What is the connection between altars of sanctuary and the cities of refuge, and why the apparent replacement of altars with cities? Who and how was the validity of the claim of unintentional killing (Numbers 35:24–25; Joshua 20:4) decided, even if the killer was a “sojourner” (gēr) (Joshua 20:9)? What was the consequence of the death of the high priest (Numbers 35:27; Joshua 20:6), and how it was related to some concept of atonement? What was the relationship between the different biblical presentations of refuge or asylum? What was the connection with the Levites (See Oxford Bibliographies in Biblical Studies articles Levi/Levites) and Levitical Cities? Finally, what is the relevance to today’s society with its issues of sanctuary for immigrants and sojourners?