Prideaux {Connection, i, 129), following the Jewish tradition, affirms that only four of the courses returned from Babylon — Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, and Ilarim (for which last, however, the Babylonian Talmud has Joiarib)— because these four only are enumerated in Ezra ii, 36-39 ; Neh. vii, 39-42. He accounts for the men- tion of other courses, as of Joiarib (1 Mace, ii, 1) and Abiah (Luke i, 5), by saying that those four courses were subdivided into six each, so as to keep up the old number of twenty-four, which took the names of the original courses, though not really descended from them. But this is probably an invention of the Jews, to account for the mention of only these four families of priests in the list of Ezra ii and Neh. vii. However difficult it may be to say with certainty why only those four
con
OB" PKIESI
In David's reign,
In list in Ezra ii ;
In Nehemiah's
In Zerubbabel'E
1 Chron.xxiv.
Neh. vii.
time, Neh. x.
time, Neh. xii.
1. Jehoiarib,
_
_
Joiarib.
1 Chr. ix, 10.
Neh. xi, 10.
2. Jedaiah.
Children of Jedaiah.
—
Jedaiah.
3. Harim.
Children of
Ilarim.
Rehum (Ha-
Ilarim.
rim, v. 15).
4. Seorim.
—
—
5. Malchijah.
Children of Pashnr, 1 Chr. ix, 12.
Malchijah.
"
6. Mijamin.
—
Mijamin.
Miamin(Mi- niamin, v.
7. Hakkoz.
—
Me re moth, son of Hak- koz, Neh. iii, 4.
17). Mcremoth.
8. Abijah.
—
Abijah.
Abijah.
9. Jeshnah.
House of Jeslma (?), Ezra ii, 36; Neh. vii, 39.
10. Shecaniah.
"
Shchaniah.
Shechaniah (Shebauiah, ver. 14).
11. Eliashib.
—
__
12. Jakim.
13. Huppah.
14. Jeshebeab.
15. Bilgah.
— .
Bilgai.
Bilgnh.
16. I miner.
Children of Immer.
Aniariah.
Amariah.
17. Hezir.
18. Aphses.
_
19. Pethahiah.
20. Jehezekel.
21. Jachin,
Neh. xi, 10;
1 Chr. ix, 10.
22. Gamul.
23. Delaiah.
24. Maaziah.
Maaziah.
Mnndiah
(Moadiah.v.
n).
*
courses are mentioned in that particular list, we have the positive authority of 1 (Jhron. ix, 10, and Neh. xi, 10, for asserting that Joiarib did return; and we have two other lists of courses, one of the time of Nehemiah (Neh. x, 2-8), the other of Zerubbabel (xii, 1-7); the former enumerating twenty-one, the latter twenty-two courses; and the latter naming Joiarib as one of them, and adding, at ver. 19, the name of the chief of the course of Joiarib in the days of Joiakim. Thus there can be no reasonable doubt that Joiarib did return. The notion of the Jews does not receive any confirmation from the statement in the Latin version of Josephus (r. Apion. ii, 8) that there were four courses of priests, as it is a manifest corruption of the text for twenty-four, as Whiston and others have shown (note to Life ofJor- sephus, § 1). The preceding table gives the three lists of courses which returned, with the original list in Da- vid's time to compare them by. The courses which can- not be identified with the original ones, but which are enumerated as existing after the return, are as follows:
Neh. x.
Neh. xii.
Neh. xi; 1 Chron. ix.
Seraiiih.
Seraiah.
Seraiah (?).
Azariah.
Ezra.
Azariah.
Jeremiah.
Jeremiah.
Pashur.
Hattush.
Hattush.
Malluch.
Malluch.
Obadiab.
Iddo.
Adaiah (?).
Daniel.
Ginnethou.
Ginnetho.
Baruch.
Meshullam.
Shemaiali.
■Shemaiah. Sallu. Amok. Hilkiah.
Jedaiah (2).
VIII.— O o
For some account of the courses, see Lewis, Orig. Heir. bk. ii, ch. vii.
III. Historical Review of the Hebrew Priesthood.— \. In Patriarchal Timet. — (1.) We accede to the Jewish opinion that Adam was the first priest. The divine in- stitution of sacrifices, immediately after the fall, seems connected with the event that "the Lord God made coats of skins to Adam and his wife, and clothed them" (Gen. iii, 21) — that is, with the skins of animals which had been offered in sacrifice, for the permission to eat animal food was not given till after the Deluge (comp. i, 29; ix, 3) — expressive of their faith in the promise of the victorious yet suffering "seed of the woman" (ver. 15); and judging from the known custom of his imme- diate descendants, we infer that Adam, now also become the head and ruler of the woman (ver. 16), officiated iii offering the sacrifice as well on her behalf as his own. Judging from the same analogy, it seems further prob- able that Adam acted in the same capacity on behalf of his sons, Cain and Abel (and possibly of their chil- dren), who are each said to have "brought" his respec- tive offering, but not to have personally presented it (iv, 3-5). The place evidently thus indicated would seem to have been the situation of "the cherubim," at the east of the garden of Eden (iii, 24), called " the face" (iv, 14), and " the presence of the Lord" (ver. 16; comp. Hebrew of Exod. xxxiv, 24; Lev. ix, 5), and from which Jehovah conferred with Cain (Gen. iv, 9) : circumstances which, together with the name of their offering, nn:^, which, sometimes at least, included bloody sacrifices in after-times (1 Sam. ii, 17 ; xxvi, 19 ; Mai. i, 13, 14), and the appropriation of the skins to the offerer (comp. Lev. vii, 8), would seem like the rudi- ments of the future Tabernacle and its services, and when viewed in connection with many circumstances incidentally disclosed in the brief fragmentary account of things before the Exodus — such as the Sabbath (Gen. ii, 2, 3), the distinction observed by Noah, and his burnt-offerings upon the altar of clean and unclean beasts (viii, 20), the prohibition of blood (ix, 4), tithes (xiv, 20), priestly blessing (ver. 19), consecration with oil, and vows (xxviii, 18-22), the Levirate law (xxxviii,