Zach'ary (Zach<irttis\ a mode of Anglicizing (2 Esdr. i, lOj the name of the prophet Zechariah.
Za'cher ( lleb. Zc'ker, "151, in pause Za'ker, ^3T, meinorud ; Sept. 7ja\ol)f) v. r. 'AuK'j^oiifi), last named of the eight sons of Jehiel the founder of Gibcon, by his wife Maacliah (1 Chron. viii, 31) ; elsewhere (ix, 37) called Zechariah (q. v.).
Za'dok (Heb. Tsndok', pllli, i-ir/hteoiis ; Sept. Zn- CwK V. r. 'S.aOCovK, 'EaCioK, etc.; Josephus So^wicof, Anf. vii, 2, 2, etc. ), the name of several Hebrews, and one that also appears occasionally in the post-Biblical his- tory. The associate of Judah the Gaulonite, the well- known leader of the agitation against the census of Quirinus, was a certain Pharisee named Zadok (Jose- phus, .4 nf. xviii, 1, 1), and the sect of the Sadducees (q. v.) is reputed to have derived both its name and origin from a person of the same name, a disciple of Antigonus of Soho. (See Lightfoot, IJebr. and Talin. Kxerc. on Matt, iii, 8 ; Renan, Vie de Jesus, p. 216.) A " Sadoc" (SladwK) finally occurs in our Saviour's genealogy (Matt, i, 14). It is, moreover, worth noticing that the New-Test, name Justus (Acts i, 23; xviii, 7; Col. iv, 11) is the literal translation of Zadok. Zedekiah, Jehozadak, may like- wise be compared.
1. Son of Ahitub, and one of the two chief priests in the time of David, Abiathar (q. v.) being the other. B.C. 1023. Zadok was of the house of Eleazar the son of Aaron (1 Chron. xxiv,.3). Thefirst mention of him isin
1 Chron. xii, 28. where we are told that he joined David at Hebron, after Saul's death, with twenty-two captains of his father's house, and apparently with nine hundred men (4600-3700, ver, 26, 27). Up "to this time, it may be concluded, he had adhered to the house of Saul. But henceforth his fidelity to David was inviolable. When Absalom revolted, and David fled from Jerusalem. Za- dok and all the Levites bearing the ark accompanied him, and it was only at the king's express command that they returned to Jerusalem, and became the me- dium of communication between the king and Hushai the Archite (2 Sam. xv, xvii). When Absalom was dead, Zadok and Abiathar were the persons who per- suaded the elders of Judah to invite David to return (xix, 11). When Adonijah, in David's old age, set up for king, and had persuaded Joab and Abiathar the priest to join his party, Zadok was unmoved, and was employed by David to anoint Solomon to be king in his room (1 Kings i ). For this fidelity he was rewarded by Solomon, who " thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord," and " put in Zadok the priest" in his room (ii, 27, 35). From this time, how- ever, we hear little of him. It is said in general terms, in the enumeration of Solomon's officers of state, that Zadok was the priest (iv, 4; 1 Chron. xxix, 22), but no single act of his is mentioned. Even in the detailed account of the building and dedication of Solomon's Temple his name does not occur, though Josephus says that "Sadoc the high-priest was the first high-priest of the Temple which Solomon built" (Ant. x, 8, 6). In
2 Sam. XV, 27 Zadok is named a seer; but we have no further or more particular information as to the revela- tions which were granted to him. See Priest.
We have no means of knowing how the high-priest- hood passed out of the line of Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, who was the elder son of Aaron, into the line of Eli, who was descended from Ithamar, Aaron's young- er son ; but we do know the doom pronounced by Jeho- vah, that the unworthy house of Eli should be dispos- sessed. No doubt much confusion had ensued upon the death of Eli's two sons, and the capture of the ark by the Philistines; of this we have abundant evidence: (i) in the unsettled position of the tabernacle, till we find David honoring .it at Gibeon ; (2) in the want of interest in the ark, till he brought it up to Mount Zion ; and (3) in the absence of any fixed centre of worship, so that Samuel sacrificed in different places, according to the irregular manner of that period of transition in
ZADOK
1058
ZALMON
which he presided. Saul apparently attempted to ex- tirpate the high-priestly house of Eli, on accoinit of what lie reckoned the treason of Abinielech (1 Sam. xxii, 17-23), so that only his son Abiatliar esca|)ed; and the following chapter narrates how this young man came to David, carrying with liim the higli- priest's ephod, and how Jehovah acknowledged him as the true high-priest, inquiring of God, on behalf of that fugitive, who was the true king of Israel. The only conjecture we feel disposed to make is that king Saul may at this time have declared that Abiathar was an outlaw, who had forfeited the high-priesthood, and may have de- clared tliat the otfice reverted to the liouse of Eleazar, to whicli Zadok belonged; there might be a stroke of policj' in his thus restoring the constitution of the priesthood according to the law of Moses, analogous to his slaughter of the Gibeonitcs, " in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah" {2 Sam. xxi, 2). If so, it is easy to see how the two rival royal houses had their rival priestly houses too; and how, at the end of the civil war, David's policy of gradual and amicable re- construction woidd lead him to acknowledge both high- priests, especially after Zadok's hearty adhesion to David's interest. Perhaps, in memory of his early mil- itary service, Zadok had a place among the princes of the tribes assigned him by David, as ruler over the Aaronites (1 ('iiron. xxvii, 17). In later times we usual- ly tind two priests, the high-priest and the second priest (2 Kings XXV, 18), and there does not seem to have been any great difference in their dignity. So, too, Luke iii, 2. Zadok and Abiathar were of nearly equal dig- nity (2 Sam. XV, 35, 3(3; xix, 11). Hophni and Phine- has, again, and Eleazar and Ithamar, are cou|iled to- gether, and seem to have been holders of the office, as it were, in commission. The duties of the office, too, were, in the case of Zadok and Abiathar, divided. Zadok min- istered before the tabernacle at Gibeon (1 Chron. xvi, 39) ; Abiathar had the care of the ark at Jerusalem; not, however, exclusively, as appears from 1 Chron. xv, 11; 2 Sam. XV, 24, 25, 29. Hence, perhaps, it may be con- cluded that from the first there was a tendency to con- sider the office of the priesthood as somewhat of the nature of a corporate office, although some of its func- tions were necessarily confined to the chief member of that corporation ; and if so, it is very easy to perceive how superior abilities, on the one hand, and infancy or incapacity, on the other, might operate to raise or de- press the members of this corporation respectively. Za- dok seems to have been succeeded in the priesthood by his son Azariah (1 Kings iv, 2), strictlj' speaking his son's son, if we observe 1 Chron. vi, 8, 9, and 2 Sam. xv, 27. That it continued without derangement in his fam- ily may be inferred by the genealogies, and from the incidental reference to "Azariah, the chief priest, of the house of Zadok," in Hezekiah's time (2 Chron. xxxi, 10). The language in Ezek. xl, 40; xliii, 19; xliv, 15; xlviii, 11 bears higli testimony to the faithfidnessof the priests, the sons of Zadok; so much so that the prophet takes no notice of any priests besides them Smith ; Fair- bairn. See High-priest.