ed himself with ‘the Lord whose name is Jealous’ (‘ He was jealous with my jealousy among them’), and determined for ever the rightful attitude of a whole-hearted servant of J” towards any en- eroachments of the abominable idolatries of the heathen. Accordingly we find that the slayin of Zimri and Cozbi was ever after one of the ἢ and stimulating memories of Israel’s past history. In the psalmist’s retrospect (Ps 106%: 31) Phinehas, it is implied, was a second Abraham. His deed of faith ‘was counted unto him for righteousness, unto all generations for evermore.’ The son of Sirach in his ‘praise of famous men’ stamps Phinehas as ‘the third in glory: after Moses and Aaron, ‘in that he was zealous in the fear of the Lord, and stood fast in the good forwardness of his soul when the people turned away, and he made reconciliation for Israel’ (Sir 45%-*). The slaughter of the apostate Jew and of the king’s commissioner at the hands of Mattathias, which initiated the Maccabean revolt, recalls to the historian the example of Phinehas, and, in his dying exhortation to his sons, Mattathias reminds them how ‘ Phinehas our father, for that he was zealous exceedingly, obtained the covenant of an everlasting priest- hood’ (1 Mac 2%-%), With respect to this cove- nant, reasons have been given under the article ABIATHAR for believing that the promise to Phinehas of an everlasting priesth was con-
PHINEHAS
ditional, as are all the promises of God, and that, in fact, Abiathar was his last direct representative. The other notices of Phinehas in the Bible history are of lesser importance. Nu 31° (P) states that he accompanied the punitive expedition against Midian, not as commander (Jos. Ant. Iv. vii. 1), but in his priestly capacity, ‘with the vessels of the sanctuary and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand,’ in accordance with the law (Nu 108:9; ef. 2Ch 1313). He was leader and spokesman of the deputation from the western tribes to the eastern concerning the erection of the altar Ed (Jog 2918. 3-82); and in Jg 20 the civil war be- tween Benjamin and the other tribes is incidentall
stated to have occurred during his high priesthood, and that the ark was then at Bethel (so also Jos. Ant. ν. ii. 10), not at Shiloh as previously and subsequently (Jos 181,1 Κ 48). Ewald (HZ ii. 313) notes that the estate given to Eleazar (Jos 24%), being called Gibeath-phinehas, is ‘a proof that in
Bis estimation he ranked even higher than hie father.’ For this place see art. GIBEAH, 3. According to 1 Ch 9” Phinehas at one time had been superintendent of the Korahite gate-keepers. ‘The sons of Phinehas’ (Ezr 8%, 1 Es 8, 1 Es 5°) seems to mean the clan of priests who elsewhere are called sons of Eleazar.
It remains that a brief mention should be made of the legends that gather round Phinehas in Rabbinical literature. His grandfather Putiel (Ex 6%) was identified with Jethro by an absurd etymology, and Phinehas, before his ἜΝ exploit, had been constantly reproached with his Midianite origin (Sota, Gemara, viii. 6, ed. Wagenseil and Targ. of Jonathan). In the Targ. of Jonathan on Nu 25, twelve signs testify to a Divine interposi- tion in the death of Zimri and Cozbi, and the promise of God receives this remarkable addition : *T will make him the angel of the covenant, that he may live for ever to proclaim redemption at the end of the days.’ A combination of this legend with Mal 4° is the probable origin of the wide- spread belief in the identity of Phinehas with
lijah (Fabricius, Cod. pseudepig. Vet. Test. ch. 170; Seder Olam, ed. Meyer, pp. 261, 845). He was also identified with the anonymous prophet of Jg 68 (Seder Olam, ch. xx.) and with the prophet who denounced Eli (Jerome, Qu. Heb. on 18 2”). Eusebius (Chron. An. 860) blonderinety identifies Phinehas with Eli. Phinehas was also said to have been the author of the last verse of the Book of Joshua, and of an explanation of sacred names (Fabricius, J.c.).
2. Younger son of Eli, 1S 1% Jos. (Ané. v. xi. 2) says that his father had resigned the office of high priesthood to him on account of his old age. ΤῈ 15 true that the biblical narrative implies throughout that Hophni and Phinehas performed the active functions of the priesthood, ut there seems no other ground for this supposed abdication in favour of the younger son than the fact that the succeeding high priests were descended from him. Hophni was probably childless. Two sons of Phinehas are mentioned, Ahitub (18 14%) and Ichabod (1 8 43). On the other hand, it is almost certain that in 2 Es 1? this Phinehas is reckoned among the high priests. That list alone inserts Heli, Phinees, and Achias (t.e. Ahijah) between Amariah and Ahitub. This is evidently an at- tempt to make a complete list by adding Eli and his successors, who are ignored in Ch, Ezr, and 1 Es, This is not the place to moralize on the excesses of Phinehas and his brother, or on their indulgent father’s dignified but feeble remon- strances, or on their miserable death. Their ritual irregularity, however, demands an explanation. They committed two distinct breaches of the law. (a) It seems clear that ‘the memorial,’ which in