From the commencement of the return from the Captivity differences arose between the returned exiles and those whom they found in Palestine on their return. These differences reveal the existence of two diverging tendencies among many of the people, the distinguishing notes of which were particularism and rigid legalism on the one hand, and universalism coupled with a less strict interpretation of legal requirements on the other. Ezra and those who followed him were the upholders of the former, the high-priestly party and their followers of the latter tendency. The process of development in either direction can be discerned in some of the later Old Testament books. In the Apocrypha we learn from Ecclesiasticus that a type of scribe had arisen whose energies were directed towards the acquisition of wisdom which he was concerned to impart to others; this type of scribe, while venerating the Law, sympathized with the universalistic rather than with the particularistic attitude. Belonging to a slightly later time are the _Chassidim_, or “Pious ones,” who were strict legalists and of a particularistic tendency, though they were not patriots in the sense that the typical Maccabæans were. The _Chassidim_ are spoken of in connexion with the Scribes. We are, therefore, led to the conclusion that before the middle of the second century B.C. two types of scribe were in existence, the wisdom scribe, and the more particularly legal scribe. Concerning these latter, who are to be regarded as the Scribes in the strictly technical sense and who became closely associated with the Pharisaic party, the following further points may be noted: upon them devolved, in addition to other duties, the guardianship of the text of Scripture. They were, further, the administrators of the Law, and were represented in the Sanhedrin, and thus sat as judges and assisted in the passing of sentences on those who had broken the Law. CHAPTER VII The Pharisees and Sadducees