1 Crônicas 6:1-15

(1-15) THE LINE OF AARON THROUGH ELEAZAR TO JEHOZADAK.

(1-3) Aaron’s descent from Levi.
(1) The sons of Levi; Gershon ... — So Gênesis 46:11; Êxodo 6:16, and uniformly in the Pentateuch. In 1 Crônicas 6:16 we have the spelling Gershom, which perhaps indicates a difference of source.

(2) The sons of Kohath. — The names are the same as in Êxodo 6:18. Kŏhath, or Kĕhath, was the chief house of Levi. The name is put second in the series, perhaps for euphonic reasons. (Comp. “Sheni, Ham, and Japhet” with Gênesis 9:24; Gênesis 10:21.)

(3) And the children. — Heb., sons (bnê ‘Âmrâm).

Aaron, and Moses. — Êxodo 6:20.

And Miriam. — Números 26:59 : “the prophetess, the sister of Aaron” (Êxodo 15:20).

The sons also of Aaron. — Heb., ‘Aharon; Arab., Hârûn. Êxodo 6:23; Números 26:60 name the four sons of Aaron in the same order as here. “Nadab and Abihu died when they offered strange fire before the Lord” (Números 26:61). A fuller account is given in Levítico 10:1.

(4-15) Twenty-two successors of Aaron, for the interval between his death and the Babylonian exile (circ. 588 B.C.). How many centuries that interval comprises is uncertain. The Exodus has been placed at various dates from 1648 B.C. (Hales), and 1491 (Usher) to circ. 1330 (Lepsius and other modern scholars), and even so late as 1265. It is premature, therefore, to object, as some have done, that twenty-two generations are too few for the period they are supposed to cover. If the later dates assigned for the Exodus be nearer the truth, an allowance of about thirty years to the generation would justify the list. At least we have no right to say that the list requires a reckoning of forty or fifty years to the generation. On the other hand, it may well be the case that some links in the chain are wanting. Comp. Esdras 7:1, where this list recurs in an abridged form, giving only fifteen names instead of twenty-two.

(4) Eleazar begat Phinehas. — Números 20:22 tells how Moses, by Divine command, made Eleazar priest in Aaron’s room. Josué 14:1; Josué 17:4 represent him as acting with Joshua in Canaan. Josué 24:33 records his death and place of burial. For Phinehas, son of Eleazar, see Êxodo 6:25; Números 25:7; Números 25:11; Juízes 20:28 (as ministering before the Ark at Bethel). The list before us appears to ignore the line of Ithamar, Aaron’s remaining son. 1 Crônicas 24:1, however, proves that the chronicler was well aware that there had been other personages of high-priestly rank besides those registered here (see especially 1 Crônicas 6:5 : “for there had been princes of the sanctuary and princes of God, of the sons of Eleazar and of the sons of Ithamar”). The line of Eleazar alone is here recorded as being at once the elder and legitimate, and also the permanent one from the time of Solomon onwards.

(5) Uzzi is assumed to have been contemporary with Eli, whose immediate descendants to the fourth generation exercised the office of the high-priest, according to the data of the Books of Samuel and Kings. The line of Eli is as follows: Eli, Phinehas, Ahitub, Ahimelech, Abiathar. (See 1 Samuel 1:28; 1 Samuel 2:4; 1 Samuel 2:11; 1 Samuel 14:3; 1 Samuel 22:9; 1 Samuel 22:20; 1 Reis 2:26.)

(6) Zerahiah begat Meraioth. — Scripture is silent as regards the six persons named in 1 Crônicas 6:6. That the line of Eleazar abstained from the priestly functions during the ascendency of the house of Ithamar-Eli, is probably nothing more than a groundless guess on the part of Josephus (Antiq. viii. 1, 3). The indications of the Scriptures point the other way. Zadok and Abiathar enjoyed a co-ordinate authority in the time of David (1 Samuel 20:25), and proofs are not wanting of the existence of more than one recognised sanctuary, in which the representatives of both houses might severally officiate. (See Note on 1 Crônicas 16:39.)

(8) Zadok was appointed sole high-priest by Solomon, who deposed Abiathar (1 Reis 2:27; 1 Reis 2:35).

Ahimaaz. — 2 Samuel 15:36; 2 Samuel 17:17; cf. 2 Samuel 18:27. In all these passages Ahimaaz appears as a young man and a fleet runner, who did service to David in the time of Absalom’s revolt. He nowhere appears as high-priest.

Azariah. — See 1 Reis 4:2, which mentions “Azariah son of Zadok the priest,” in a list of Solomon’s grandees. The remark in 1 Crônicas 6:10, “he who served as priest in the house that Solomon built in Jerusalem,” enigmatical where it stands, is intelligible if connected with Azariah son of Ahimaaz; contrasting him with his grandfather, Zadok, who had ministered at Gibeon (1 Crônicas 16:39); and with the other high-priests who were his namesakes, as the first Azariah. Solomon reigned forty years. Azariah, therefore, may have succeeded to the priesthood before his death.

(10) Johanan begat Azariah. — Johanan is un. known. The name Azariah occurs thrice in the present list — viz., in 1 Crônicas 6:9; 1 Crônicas 6:13. We have already identified the first with the son, or rather grandson, of Zadok, who is mentioned in 1 Reis 4:2. A high-priest (Azariah) withstood King Uzziah’s assumption of priestly privilege (2 Crônicas 26:17), circ. 740 B.C. The Jewish exegetes Rashi and Kimchi supposed him to be identical with Azariah son of Johanan, fancifully explaining the remark, “he it is that executed the priest’s office in the temple,” &c., as a reference to his bold defence of the priestly prerogative against the king himself. If this were right, several names would be omitted in 1 Crônicas 6:9. But we have seen that the remark in question really belongs to a former Azariah, and has been transposed from its original position in 1 Crônicas 6:9 by the inadvertence of some copyist. Another Azariah is mentioned (2 Crônicas 31:10) as “chief priest of the house of Zadok,” early in the reign of Hezekiah. Him, too, we fail to identify with either of the Azariahs of the present list. (See 1 Crônicas 6:13, Note.)

(11) Azariah begat Amariah. — Perhaps the Amariah of 2 Crônicas 19:11, who was high-priest under Jehoshaphat.

(12) And Ahitub begat Zadok, and Zadok begat Shallum. — See 1 Crônicas 6:8 : “And Ahitub begat Zadok.” The recurrence of names in the same families is almost too common to require notice, except where confusion of distinct persons has resulted or is likely to result, as in the instance of those among our Lord’s immediate followers, who bore the names of Simon, Judas, and James.

Somewhere about this part of the list we miss the name of Jehoiada, the famous king-maker, who put down Athaliah and set up Joash (2 Crônicas 23). In like manner, Urijah, the too compliant high-priest of the reign of Ahaz, who flourished a generation or so later, is conspicuous here by omission (2 Reis 16:10).

Urijah may have been omitted because of his unworthy connivance in an unlawful worship, not, however, as “an unimportant man,” as Keil thinks. (Comp. Isaías 8:2.) But if the list is a list of actual high-priests, Jehoiada can only have been omitted by accident, unless indeed he is represented in it by an unrecognised alias. Double names are common in Scripture, from Jacob-Israel, Esau-Edom, downwards.

(13) Hilkiah begat Azariah. — Hilkiah is probably the well-known high-priest who “found the Book of the Law” which led to the great reformation of Josiah’s reign (2 Reis 22:8, seq.). Azariah, his son, is not elsewhere mentioned. The Azariah of 2 Crônicas 31:10, who figures as high-priest under Hezekiah, at least eighty years earlier, is absent from this list.

(14) Seraiah begat Jehozadak. — Seraiah was still high-priest at the moment of the fall of Jerusalem (588 B.C.). Nebuchadnezzar caused him to be put to death at Riblah (2 Reis 25:18; Jeremias 52:24, seq.) From Azariah (1 Crônicas 6:10) to Seraiah we find only ten names. In the list of the kings of Judah for about the same interval eighteen names occur (see 1 Crônicas 3:10). This fact undoubtedly suggests the omission of some generations from the list before us.

The use of the word “begat” throughout the series is not to be pressed to the contrary conclusion. Like the term “son” in Esdras 7:3 (“Azariah, son of Meraioth,” though six intermediate names are given in Chron.), it is a somewhat elastic technical formula in these genealogies.

(15) And Jehozadak went into captivity. — The Heb. is went away. Our version rightly supplies into captivity. (Comp. Jeremias 49:3.) Jehozadak was presumably a child at the time; half a century later a son of his, the high-priest Jeshua or Joshua, returned with Zerubbabel at the head of the first colony of restored exiles, 536 B.C. (Ageu 1:1; Esdras 3:2).

When the Lord carried away Judah and Jerusalem by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar. — The chronicler is generally charged with a strong Levitical and priestly bias, in unfavourable contrast to the “prophetical” tendency of the writers of Samuel and Kings. The sentiment of this verse, however, and of many other passages, is thoroughly accordant with the point of view of the greater prophets. Isaiah, e.g., never wearies of proclaiming that the Assyrian conquerors were mere instruments in the hands of Jehovah, unconsciously executing His fore-ordained purposes.

Nebuchadnezzar. — So the name is spelt in Kings, Chronicles, and Daniel, but incorrectly. Jeremias 24:2, &c., reads Nebuchadrezzar, which is nearer the true name, Nabium-kudurri-açur (Nebo protect the crown).