ofsupervisi ver those that "kept the charge of the
sanctuary," intrusted to Eleazar (Numb, iii, 32), implies that some others were subject to it b< >id< ss Ithamar and his children, while these v erj keepers of the sanctuary are id. ntified in ver. 38 with the sous of Aaron w bo are encamped with Moses and Aaron on the east Bide of the l he allotment of not less than thirteen cities to lle.se who bore the name, within little more than i..ii\ years from the Exodus, tends to the same conclusion, and at any rate indicates that the priest- hood were not intended to be always in attendance at
the tabernacle, but were to have 1 es of their own.
and therefore, as a necessary consequence, fixed periods only of service. Some notion maj be formed of the
number on the accession of David from the facts (1) that not less than .'!7m» tendered their allegiance to him while be was as yet reigning at Hebron over Judah only (1 Chron. xii, 27), and (2) that one twenty-fourth part were sufficient for all the services of the statelier ami more frequented worship which be established. To this reign belonged, accordingly, the division of the priest- hood into the four- and- twenty "courses" or orders T'p'T'i'z (Sept. iiino-rTMr. lipnfitpiai, 1 Chron. xxiv, 1 19; •_' Chron. xxiii. 8; Luke i. 5), each of which was to serve in rotation for one week, while the further as- signment of special services during the week was de- termined by lot (Luke i.!» ) under a subordinate prefect (2 Kings xi. 5. 7). but all attended at the -real festivals (2
( bron. v. 1 1 |. The first oi these coura a was that which had Jehoiarib at the head of it. It was reckoned the most honorable. Josephus values himself on bis de- scent from it ( Life, § 1 I. Mallathias. the lather of the Maccabees, descended from it (1 Mace, ii, 1). Abijah was the head of the eighth course, to which Zacharias, the father <>f the Baptist, belonged (Luke i. 5). Each course appears to have commenced its work on the Sab- bath, the outgoing priests taking the morning sacrifice, and leaving that of the evening to their successors (2 Chron. xxiii, 8 ; Ugolino, xiii, 319). In this division, however, the tWO great priestly houses did not stand <m an equality. The descendants of Ithamar were found to have fewer representatives than those of Eleazar (a diminution that may have been caused partly by the slaughter of the priests who accompanied Hophni and Phinehas [Psa. lxxviii, 64], partly by the massacre at Nob), and sixteen courses accordingly were assigned to the latter, eight only to the former t 1 Chron. xxiv. 4; comp. Carpzov. App. Crit. p. 98). The division thus instituted was confirmed by Solomon, and continued to be recognised as the typical number of the priesthood. It is to be noted, however, that this arrangement was to some extent elastic. Any priest might be present at
any time, and even perform priestly acts, go Ion-- as he .lid not interfere with the functions of those who were officiating in their course (Ugolino, xiii, 881), and at the great solemnities of the year, as well as on special occa- sions like the opening of the Temple, they wer.- present in great numbers. On the return from the Captivity there were found but four courses out of the twenty- four, each containing, in round numbers, about a thou- sand t Ezra ii. of. 39). The causes of this great reduc- tion are not stated, but large numbers must have per- ished in the siege and storm of Jerusalem (Lam. iv. 16). and many may have preferred remaining in Babylon. Out of these returning exiles, however, to revive, at leas;, tie- idea of the old organization, the four-and- twenty courses were reconstituted, bearing the same names ;is before, and so continued till the destruction of Jerusalem (Josephus, Ant. \ ii. 1 1,7). If we may ac- cept the numbers given by Jewish writers as at all trust- worthy, the proportion of the priesthood to the popula- tion of Palestine during the last century ot their exist- ence as an order must have been far greater than that of the clergy has ever been in any Christian nation. ( her and above those that were scattered in the coun- try and took their turn, there were not fewer than 24,000 stationed permanently .at Jerusalem and 12,000 at Jer- icho (Gemar. Hieros. Taanith. fob t;7. in Carpzov. App. Crit. p. 100). ll was a Jewish tradition that it had never fallen to tb.- lot of any priest to offer incense twici (Ugolino, xii. is «. Oriental statistics are, bow- ever, always open to Bome suspicion, those of the Tal- mud not least so; and there is. probably, more truth in iii. computation of Josephus, who estimates the total
number of the four bouses of the priest! I, referring
apparently to Ezra Li, 36, at about 20, I c. Apian, ii.7).
Another indication of number is found in the fact that a "ureal multitude" could attach themselves to the ■seei of the Nazarenes" (Acts vi, 7), and so have cut themselves off, sooner or later, from the Temple ser-
PRIEST
577
PRIEST
vices, without any perceptible effect upon its ritual. It was almost inevitable that tlie great mass of the order, under such circumstances, should sink in character and reputation. Poor and ignorant, despised and oppressed by the more powerful members of their own body, often robbed of their scanty maintenance by the rapacity of the high-priests, they must have been to Palestine what the clergy of a later period has been to Southern Italy — a dead weight on its industry and strength, not com- pensating for their unproductive lives by any services rendered to the higher interests of the people. The rabbinic classification of the priesthood, though belong- ing to a somewhat later date, reflects the contempt into which the order had fallen. There were (1) the heads of the twenty-four courses, known sometimes as apxn- pfic; (2) the large number of reputable officiating but inferior priests; (3) the plebeii, or (to use the extremest formula of rabbinic scorn) the "priests of the people of the earth," ignorant and unlettered; (4) those that, through physical disqualifications or other causes, were non-efficient members of the order, though entitled to receive their tithes (Ugolino, xii, 18 ; Jost, Judenth. i, 156).