(2) Jehoiada (2 K U», 2 Ch 22", etc.), and Urijah (2 K 16iiff), are not mentioned, and the order of the priests appears incor- rect. Amariah was chief priest in the reign ol Jehoshaphat (2 Ch 11)11). The next priests mentioned in the historical books are Azariah in the reign of Uzziah (2 Ch 202*'), und Hilkiah in the reign of Josiah (2 K 22^, 2 Ch 340). jn this list, however, there is no Azariah between Amariah and Hilkiah.
(3) The number of priests, including Aaron, from the Exodus to the Capti\ity, is exactly 23. Allowing forty years, or a genera- tion, for each, this gives 40 x 12+40 x II years. Now, accoitling to the artificial chronology of P, Jg, 1 and 2 K, 1 and 2 Ch (see CimONOLOQV OP OT), 480 years elapsed from the Exodus to the founding of Solomon's temple (1 K 6i), and 480 years from thence to the founding of the second temple, and the Captivity occurred in the eleventh generation of this second period. Ilence these 22 names seem chosen to fit exactly into this chronologico/ scheme. This is still further seen in the statement— transferring lUb to 9b (Be. Oe. Zoe.)— that Azariah the 13th priest (includiiig Aaron) ministered in Solomon's temple.
(4) There is a surprising number of names occurring more than once. Such repetition, wliile possible in a genuine pedi- gree, has decidedly a suspicious look, as though the uunes were used simply to represent so much time.
Hence, in view of these facts, it is evident that this list of names, covering many centuries, does not rest entirely upon historical records, but, asa whole, isartificial. This accords with the modprn critical \iew of the late origin of the Levitical law and institutions (OTJC, Lect. ix.-xiii. ; LOJ"^ pp. 126-159). The explanation of Josephus mentioned is not based upon facts, but ij a mere sunnise. That this list should not be in harmony with statements elsewhere in 1 and 2 Ch shows that it prob- ably did not originate with the author of Chronicles, but represented a notion about the line of priests, var>ing from that which he elsewhere followed. KL assigns it to the subse- quent additions of 1 and 2 Ch. (On this list see We. Prot. pp. 222 ff.).
13. Jehozadak (12) : Jeshua, Joiakim, Eliashib, Joiada, Jonatlum, Jaddua, Ezr 3^, Neh 12"*'-.
This genealogy brings the Hst of high priests down to the time of Alexander the Great (Josep)ius, Ani. xi. viii. 4).
14. Aaron (10): Eleazar (11), Phinehas (12), Abt- shna, Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Azaria^i, Atfianah, Ahitub, Zadok, Shallum, Hilkiah, Azar- iah, Seraiah, Ezra, Ezr 7'*^.
This ancestry of Ezra, the priest and scribe (see Etra), Is evidently the same as that of Jehozadak (12) given in a shorter form. Ezra appears to have been a descendant, probably a great - grandson, of SeraiaJi f. Jehozadak, through a younger brother. Ot similar descent is Azariah (Seraiah, Neh 11 H) s. Hilkiah, s. Meshullam (=Shalluni), 8. Zadok, s. Meraioth, a. Aliitub, mentioned among the priests residing in Jerus. (1 Ch 9'i, Neh nil). Seraiah is probably the correct reaidliig, since Vje substitution of Azariah might be suggested by 1 Ch (il^, but wot the converse. The two names api^ear, however, elscwi-.eiv interchanged (cf. Ezr 22 with Neh 77). This Seraiah repre- sented a division of the post-exihc priests in Jerus. (Neh llUT). That he should belong to the high priest's family has been thought striking (Sm. p. 8),
15. Jehoiarib, Jedaiah, Harim, Seorim, Mai- chijah (16), .Mijamin, Hakkoz, Abijah, Jesliua, Sliecaniah, EUaahib, Jakim, Hujij-ah, Jeshebuab, Bilj^ah, Immer(17), Hezir, Hajipizzez, Pethahiah, Jeliezkel, Jachin, Gamul, Dclaiah, Maaziah, 1 Ch 24'-".
• The observation on Axariah in v.W also showv thit, t The Jewish explanation of these facts, given by Josephus, \s that the family of Phinehas s. of Aaron, n-pri'senlcd in (12), at first held the high priestlioixl, and aftenvanis it was trans- fi-rred in Ell to the family of Ithamar s. Aaron, who held the pritsthuod until Ziidok's establishment, which restored it again to the family of Phinehna, which had in the meantime been in private hfe(Jo8. AnL v. xl. 6. viii. i. 3). This explanation has usually been received. (Ke. thinks that aft^T the slaughter of t)ie priests at Nob the tabernacle was niovctl to Cibeon, and the high pries til o(>d intrust^-d to Za^Iok's (atlier, and thus, durins the reign of I>avid. Ziulok was pritst at liilKK)n |1 Ch HfK*), oiid Abialhar at Jeruft;ileu»). The Chronicler evidently held to tliis double line of priests, for he 8a\'8 that both Elcar.ar and Ithamar execut4-d tlie prieet'i olflce, and places Zailok a« thf reprcsi-ntative ot the former and Ahimcl«f:ti(ev1dently Abiathar H. Ahimelech) u rep'.'OMinting the latt4^ at Uie time of 1>»\ J (1 Ch 24»ff )
124
GEIfEALOGT
GENEALOGY
These are the names of the heads of the twenty-four courses of priests, sixteen taken from the ss. Eleazar and eight from the ■s. Ithauiar, who, ace. to the Chronicler, were ossij^ned hy David for ser^'ice in the house of the Lord. Jelioiarib, Jedaiuli, and Jachin appear also amonj? the priests or priostlv families of the post-o.\ilic inhabitants of Jerus. (1 Oh 9'0, Nch n").
16. Malchijah (15) : Paskhur, Jeroham, Adaiah, 1 Ch 9".
17. Immer(15): Meshillemith, Meskullnm, Jah- zerah, Adiel, Maasai, 1 Ch Q'^, cf. Neh U'-'-.
Adaiah (16) and Maasai (*'w V O = *DY''?y Amashsai, Neh 1113) (17) are amon(^ the post-ex. priests or pnestly families of Jeru- salem. In Ni-h nl2f. the pedi^ees are sli;;htly dilTerent, i.e. Malchijah, I'anhhur, Zechariah, Amzi, Pelaliah, Jeroham, Adaiah ; Immer, Meihillemoth, Ahzai, Azarel, Amaslisai.