1 Chronicleschapter 24
31 verses · Ezra, by tradition · 450 to 400 BC · History
But Nadab and Abihu died before their father did, and they had no sons; so Eleazar and Ithamar served as priests.
Introduction
Ezra, by tradition, History, 1 Chronicles Overview.
This chapter was written for priests of the second temple who served in exactly the divisions it lists. It is a register of names, and every name on it was a family's place in the service of God. The priesthood came through only two of Aaron's four sons, and one branch was twice the size of the other. The first hearers knew why a public lot mattered when honour and duty were being shared out. Listen for who stood watching when the lots were cast. Then look for the eighth name on the list, because it returns in the first chapter of Luke's Gospel.
Context
- Who
- Priests of the second temple who served in exactly these courses
- What
- A register of the twenty-four divisions of priests, drawn by lot, followed by a list of the remaining Levites.
- Where
- The court of the sanctuary in Jerusalem, before the king, the priests and the heads of the families.
- When
- The last year of David's reign, about 970 BC, a date held as approximate.
- Why
- To settle fairly which priestly family served when, so that the service was shared by lot.
Historical context
The chapter belongs to David acting with two priests, Zadok of Eleazar's line and Ahimelech of Ithamar's. Aaron had four sons, and Nadab and Abihu died before their father with no children, so the whole priesthood descends from the other two.
Show the rest of the historical context, 5 more paragraphs
The place is the sanctuary court in Jerusalem, in the last year of the reign, about 970 BC on the dating the earlier rows carry.
The occasion is the settling of turns. Eleazar's line had sixteen heads of families and Ithamar's had eight, and the twenty-four courses were still drawn by lot, one house against the other in turn.
A first hearer knew who was watching, because the text names them. They are the king, the officers, Zadok, Ahimelech, the heads of the priestly and Levite families, and Shemaiah the scribe who recorded the result. Casting lots in public took patronage out of the process, and no family could claim it had bought the better week.
A reader today has to be told how long the system ran. Each course came up to Jerusalem for a week at a time, and all twenty-four served together at the pilgrim feasts when the crowds were largest. The rabbis' later records describe the same rotation, and the New Testament assumes it. Zechariah the father of John the Baptist was serving in the course of Abijah, which is the eighth name on this list.
The arrangement has a wider parallel. Organising a large sanctuary by family into rotating shares was ordinary across the ancient Near East, and the Babylonian prebend archives of Uruk and Sippar record the same practice.
Significance
For the returning priests this was the duty roster, and it settled the most difficult question a rebuilt temple faced, which was who serves when and who takes the great days.
Show the rest of the significance, 1 more paragraph
The answer was a lot cast in public before witnesses, so honour in God's house was assigned rather than negotiated. That was the protection a small and quarrelsome community needed.
This chapter in Jewish lifeWhat this chapter is in Jewish life and reading.
What is done
1 Chronicles carries no weekly portion and no Haftarah, and no part of it is read in the synagogue service on any Sabbath of the year. In the Hebrew Bible Chronicles stands among the Writings, and the Haftarah is drawn from the Prophets, so the yearly cycle passes this book over entirely. This site's own table of synagogue readings records the same absence. It holds no portion, no Haftarah use and no festival reading for any of the twenty-nine chapters of the book.
This chapter sets up the rota that governed who served in the sanctuary and when, and Rashi reads it as a change made to an older arrangement rather than as a fresh invention. On his account there had been sixteen watches at the tabernacle in Shiloh, eight from Eleazar and eight from Ithamar, as the tractate Taanit sets out. David saw that the men of Eleazar had grown many, divided each of their watches in two to make sixteen, and left the eight watches of Ithamar as they had been. Rashi supports the reading from the wording of the sixth verse about what was established for each house. He takes the whole arrangement as the tabernacle's order carried over into the temple (Rashi on I Chronicles 24:4:1). The twenty-four courses this produces are the rota the priesthood worked by for as long as there was a temple to work in. The rabbinic source Rashi cites, Taanit 27a:9, stands in this chapter's own corpus file.
Rashi also describes how the order within the rota was fixed and kept. The lots of the fifth verse decide which house is first, which second and so on through them all (Rashi on I Chronicles 24:5:1). The writing down of the sixth verse is a record made so that the order could be remembered afterwards (Rashi on I Chronicles 24:6:1).
How it is read
The corpus carries seven kept notes of Rashi for this chapter in The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg, under CC-BY.
The longest of them is about succession rather than rota. The chapter says that Nadab and Abihu died before their father and had no sons. Rashi draws the consequence. Eleazar and Ithamar served in their place, and had Nadab and Abihu left children those children would have come first in the high priesthood. He then shows the same rule working at a later date, tracing the line of Seraiah through Jehozadak into the exile and back. Joshua the son of Jehozadak served after the return while Ezra did not, because the son of the firstborn brother takes precedence (Rashi on I Chronicles 24:2:1). The whole argument is an argument about birth order, and it is brought to explain a verse that states only a death and an absence of sons.
Three shorter notes tidy the list. At the first verse Rashi supplies the sense of the opening words as a heading over the divisions that follow (Rashi on I Chronicles 24:1:1). At the third he identifies the Ahimelech named there with Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, and proves it from the sixth verse (Rashi on I Chronicles 24:3:1). At the nineteenth he says that the men written in the list are the heads of the watches, and that the appointments named are appointments over those watches (Rashi on I Chronicles 24:19:1).
Metzudat David carries the second half of the chapter, where the remaining Levites are listed, and Radak comments at three places. Their refs are carried with the reason that Sefaria holds no English version of them, so they stand here cited and unquoted. Metzudat David comments at I Chronicles 24:1:1, 24:2:1, 24:4:1, 24:6:1, 24:20:1, 24:21:1, 24:22:1, 24:23:1, 24:25:1, 24:26:1, 24:27:1, 24:28:1, 24:29:1 and 24:30:1. Radak comments at I Chronicles 24:3:1, 24:5:1 and 24:31:1.
What the rabbis say
The corpus carries twenty rabbinic locators for this chapter and the text of none, so each is cited and linked here rather than quoted. Four stand on the second verse, the death of Nadab and Abihu: Midrash Tanchuma, Achrei Mot 6:1, Vayikra Rabbah 20:10, and Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 362:2 and 525:1. Four stand on the fifth, the casting of lots for the order of service: Aggadat Bereshit 22:1, Midrash Tanchuma Buber, Vayera 45:2, Pesikta DeRav Kahana 12:5, and Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:2:5. Four stand on the nineteenth, the appointed order of coming into the house of the LORD: Bamidbar Rabbah 12:20, Otzar Midrashim, Baraita of The 32 Midot of Aggadah 1:22, and Sifrei Bamidbar 46:1 and 46:2.
Two stand on the sixth, the scribe writing the houses down before the king and the princes: Vayikra Rabbah 1:3 and Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 428:5. The rest are single locators. Taanit 27a:9 stands on the fourth verse, and it is the passage Rashi himself draws on for the sixteen watches of Shiloh. Midrash Tannaim on Deuteronomy 18:8:2 is carried across the fourth to the sixth verses together. Jerusalem Talmud Bava Kamma 9:10:1 is carried across the seventh to the eighteenth, the full roll of the twenty-four courses. Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 392:4 stands on the first verse, Jerusalem Talmud Taanit 4:2:6 on the fifteenth, and Sanhedrin 20b:12 on the twenty-third. What each of them teaches is a saying of the rabbis, and is reported as theirs wherever this site quotes one. The quotations wait on a fetch that carries the text.
Sources: Rashi, Rashi on I Chronicles 24:1:1 to 24:19:1, seven kept notes in The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg, CC-BY; Metzudat David, Metzudat David on I Chronicles 24:1:1 to 24:30:1, fourteen refs cited because the corpus carries no English text; Radak, Radak on I Chronicles 24:3:1, 24:5:1 and 24:31:1, cited by ref because the corpus carries no English text; The Sefaria corpus, scripts/data/sources/sefaria/1-chronicles/24.json, the 20 Talmud and Midrash locators of this chapter; This site's table of synagogue readings, src/lib/hebraic/readings.ts, which records no portion, no Haftarah use and no festival reading for 1 Chronicles.
The heads below are this chapter's scenes. The numbered points under each are its verses.
Twenty-four priestly courses settled by lot
1 Chronicles 24:1-3
These were the divisions of the descendants of Aaron: Aaron had four sons, but Nadab and Abihu died without children under the fire of Leviticus 10. David divides the courses “With the help of Eleazar’s descendant Zadok and Ithamar’s descendant Ahimelech”. Some texts of Samuel name Abiathar beside Zadok, a detail the commentators note without resolving it.
1 Chronicles 24:1
“Now these are the divisions of the sons of Aaron,.... Into the classes or courses following: the sons of Aaron; Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar; 1Ch 6:3, these were the immediate sons of Aaron; but the division or distribution of them into classes are of their posterity in the times of David, who descended from the two latter.”
Nadab and Abihu died before: Nadab and Abihu died childless while Aaron still lived, so the priesthood passed through Eleazar and Ithamar. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown point to Numbers 3:4 and 26:61. Adam Clarke adds that Eleazar later became high priest, and Ithamar's family returned to that office under Eli.
1 Chronicles 24:2
“Nadab and Abihu died before their father - That is, during his lifetime. Eleazar and Ithamar executed the priest’s office - These two served the office during the life of their father Aaron; after his death Eleazar succeeded in the high priesthood. And under Eli the high priest, the family of Ithamar re-entered into that office.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
2 more voices on this verse
1 Chronicles 24:2
“But Nadab and Abihu died before their father,.... While he was living, see Lev 10:1. and had no children, therefore Eleazar and Ithamar executed the priests' office: otherwise, as Jarchi observes, had their brethren left children, they would have come into the office before them.”
1 Chronicles 24:2
“Nadab and Abihu died before their father--that is, not in his presence, but during his lifetime (see Nu 3:4; 26:61). therefore Eleazar and Ithamar executed the priest's office--In consequence of the death of his two oldest sons without issue, the descendants of Aaron were comprised in the families of Eleazar and Ithamar.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
David divided them according to: Zadok and Ahimelech help David set the priestly divisions. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown find this puzzling, since 2 Samuel 15:24 and 20:25 pair Abiathar with Zadok in David's day. John Gill calls Zadok and Ahimelech the heads of the two houses, serving as high priest and deputy.
1 Chronicles 24:3
“And David distributed them,.... The posterities of Eleazar and Ithamar into certain classes or courses: both Zadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of the sons of Ithamar; these were the two principal men of the respective families, the one was high priest, and the other "sagan" or deputy; or they both officiated as high priests alternately, until the one was removed in Solomon's time, and the other established alone.”
1 more voice on this verse
1 Chronicles 24:3
“Zadok and Ahimelech (rather Abiathar, see 1Ch 24:6) assisted David in drawing up the priestly courses, as the “captains of the host” assisted him in making the divisions of the singers 1Ch 25:1.”
1 Chronicles 24:4-6
more leaders were found among Eleazar’s descendants: The text records the imbalance: “sixteen heads of families from the descendants of Eleazar and eight from the descendants of Ithamar”. The courses are still “divided by lot”, one house drawn against another in turn. The commentators note that lots settle a sacred office again at Acts 1:26.
Thus they were divided by: Lots set the divisions between Eleazar's and Ithamar's houses. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown say the lot removed all cause of jealousy over rank. Matthew Henry calls the lot an appeal to God and compares the choice of Matthias in Acts 1:26.
1 Chronicles 24:5
“One sort with another - i. e., “the assignment of their order in the courses was made by lot to the families belonging to Eleazar, and to the families belonging to Ithamar, equally.” Both houses had furnished functionaries of the highest class, and therefore no preference was now given to either over the other.”
2 more voices on this verse
1 Chronicles 24:5
“The lot is an appeal to God, and ought to be managed with corresponding reverence and sincerity. Matthias was chosen to the apostleship by lot, with prayer ( Acts i. 24, 26 ), and I know not but it might be still used in faith in parallel cases, as an instituted ordinance.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
1 Chronicles 24:5
“Thus were they divided by lot--This method of allocation was adopted manifestly to remove all cause of jealousy as to precedence and the right of performing particular duties.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
Shemaiah son of Nethanel: , a Levite scribe, records the names before the king, the officers, Zadok and Ahimelech. The houses take turns, Eleazar's first, then Ithamar's. Adam Clarke calls Eleazar the firstborn of Aaron and says his house therefore drew first in each pair.
1 Chronicles 24:6
“And Shemaiah - “Moses the great scribe, who is called Shemaiah, the son of Nethaneel, of the tribe of Levi, wrote them down.” - T. One principal household - for Eleazar - The family of Eleazar was the most illustrious of the sacerdotal families, because Eleazar was the first-born of Aaron, Ithamar’s family was the second in order and dignity; therefore one of the principal families of Eleazar was first taken, and then one of Ithamar’s, and thus alternately till the whole was finished.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
1 Chronicles 24:7-13
The first lot fell to Jehoiarib: The lot gives “the eighth to Abijah”, and Luke 1:5 names Zechariah as a priest of the division of Abijah. Zechariah was serving his division's turn in the temple when Gabriel met him, so this roster dates the opening scene of the New Testament.
the third to Harim: The third lot falls to Harim and the fourth to Seorim. Albert Barnes, on verse 5, says the lots were drawn for the families of Eleazar and of Ithamar equally, so neither house was preferred.
the fifth to Malchijah: Malchijah draws the fifth lot and Mijamin the sixth. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, on verse 5, say the lot was used to remove all jealousy over precedence among the priestly houses.
the eighth to Abijah: Hakkoz draws the seventh lot and Abijah the eighth. Luke 1:5 places Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, in the division of Abijah. Bede took this Abijah to be a high priest in the time of King David.
the ninth to Jeshua: Jeshua draws the ninth lot and Shecaniah the tenth. Matthew Henry, on verse 5, calls the lot an appeal to God, to be used with reverence and sincerity by those who cast it.
the eleventh to Eliashib: Eliashib draws the eleventh lot and Jakim the twelfth. These close the first half of the twenty-four courses. John Gill, on verse 3, says David sorted the families of Eleazar and Ithamar into these classes or courses.
the thirteenth to Huppah: Huppah draws the thirteenth lot and Jeshebeab the fourteenth. Adam Clarke, on verse 6, says the drawing went by turns, one family of Eleazar and then one of Ithamar, until all were placed.
1 Chronicles 24:14-19
the fifteenth to Bilgah: The roster runs to its twenty-fourth lot, Maaziah. Verse 19 closes it with a claim, that the order follows Aaron's regulations, “as the LORD, the God of Israel, had commanded him”. A few of these course names return in Ezra's list of priests who came back from exile.
the seventeenth to Hezir: Hezir draws the seventeenth lot and Happizzez the eighteenth. Albert Barnes, on verse 5, notes that both houses had supplied officers of the highest class, so neither was given preference in the draw.
the nineteenth to Pethahiah: Pethahiah draws the nineteenth lot and Jehezkel the twentieth. Matthew Henry, on verse 5, points to Acts 1:26, where Matthias was chosen for the apostleship by lot, with prayer.
the twenty-first to Jachin: Jachin draws the twenty-first lot and Gamul the twenty-second. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, on verse 5, say the lot settled the right to perform each duty and left no cause for jealousy between houses.
the twenty-third to Delaiah: Delaiah draws the twenty-third lot and Maaziah the twenty-fourth. Maaziah's lot closes the priestly courses. Albert Barnes, on verse 31, supposes the Levites also had twenty-four courses to match these twenty-four priestly ones.
This was their appointed order: The courses keep the order given to Aaron. Albert Barnes reads the verse as a numbered order for each course's attendance in the house of the LORD. Aaron had received that order from God.
1 Chronicles 24:19
These were the orderings ... - i. e., “this was the numerical order fixed for their ministerial attendance in the house of the Lord - an attendance which was after the manner determined for them by their forefather Aaron, according to instructions which he received from God.”
The remaining Levites and their fathers' houses
1 Chronicles 24:20-31
these were the remaining descendants of Levi: A second census follows for “the remaining descendants of Levi”. Albert Barnes counts twenty-five family heads here against the twenty-four priestly courses, and the text leaves the difference unexplained. Verse 31 restates the method, since these houses also “cast lots in the presence of King David”.
1 Chronicles 24:20
“The object of this second enumeration of the Levitical families (compare 1 Chr. 23:7-23) seems to be the designation of the heads of the families in David’s time. The omission of the Gershonites is curious, and can only be accounted for by supposing that the author did not find any account of their heads in his authorities. The addition to the Merarites 1Ch 24:26-27 is also curious. It brings the number of families up to twenty-five, which is one more than we should have expected.”
1 more voice on this verse
1 Chronicles 24:20
“The particular account of these establishments is of little use to us now; but, when Ezra published it, it was of great use to direct their church affairs after their return from captivity into the old channel again.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
The first was Isshiah: Isshiah is first among Rehabiah's sons. Rehabiah was the son of Eliezer and grandson of Moses, as 1 Chronicles 23:15 to 17 records. Matthew Henry says these lists guided the Levites' service after the return from captivity.
from the sons of Shelomoth: Shelomoth heads the Izharites, and Jahath heads the next generation under him. 1 Chronicles 23:18 names him Shelomith, first among the sons of Izhar. Matthew Henry says Ezra's publishing of these records set the temple's affairs back in their old channel.
Jeriah was the first: The four sons of Hebron are Jeriah, Amariah, Jahaziel and Jekameam. Albert Barnes notes that the Hebrew lacks Hebron and the first here, and that translators rightly supplied them from 1 Chronicles 23:19. He takes the four as heads of the Hebronite houses in David's time.
1 Chronicles 24:23
“Neither “Hebron” nor “the first” is found in the present Hebrew text; but they seem to have been rightly supplied by our translators from 1Ch 23:19. The four persons named appear to have been contemporaries of David, the heads of the Hebronite houses in his time (compare 1Ch 26:31).”
from the sons of Micah: Micah heads the sons of Uzziel, and his son Shamir follows him. 1 Chronicles 23:20 names Micah first among Uzziel's sons. Matthew Henry says Ezra's publishing of these lists guided temple affairs after the return from captivity.
The brother of Micah: Isshiah, Micah's brother, is the second son of Uzziel, and his son Zechariah follows him. The pair match the list at 1 Chronicles 23:20. Matthew Henry notes these records put worship back in its old channel after the exile.
Mahli and Mushi: Merari's sons Mahli and Mushi head two branches of the house. Albert Barnes reads Beno as the Hebrew for his son, attached to Jaaziah. He finds three Merarite branches here: Mahli, Mushi and Jaaziah.
1 Chronicles 24:26
“The sons of Jaaziah, Beno - Beno is not really a name. It is the Hebrew for “his son,” and is to be attached to Jaaziah. Translate 1Ch 24:27, “and the sons of Merari by Jaaziah his son (were) Shoham and Zaccur, and Ibri.” The meaning of the whole passage 1Ch 24:26-30 seems to be that there were three branches of the Merarites the Beni-Mahli, the Beni-Mushi, and the Beni-Jaaziah.”
The descendants of Merari from Jaaziah: Jaaziah's line within Merari gives Shoham, Zaccur and Ibri. Albert Barnes, on verse 26, takes Beno here as his son and renders the verse as Merari's sons by Jaaziah his son. Barnes counts Jaaziah as a third Merarite branch beside Mahli and Mushi.
who had no sons: Eleazar, of the house of Mahli, had no sons. His daughters married their cousins, the sons of Kish, as 1 Chronicles 23:22 records. Adam Clarke ties this to the law for Zelophehad's daughters in Numbers 27 and 36.
Jerahmeel the son of Kish: Jerahmeel son of Kish carries on the line of Kish, Mahli's second son. The sons of Kish married Eleazar's daughters, as 1 Chronicles 23:22 records. Matthew Henry says Ezra's publishing of these lists guided worship after the captivity.
And the sons of Mushi: Mushi's sons are Mahli, Eder and Jerimoth. They close the list of Levite families. John Gill, on 1 Chronicles 23:23, notes that the same three names appear there, with Mahli named after his uncle.
they also cast lots in: The Levites cast lots before King David, Zadok and Ahimelech, as their priestly brothers had done. Albert Barnes reads the verse to mean the older families had no advantage over the younger. He counts twenty-five families in the lists against twenty-four courses.
1 Chronicles 24:31
“The principal fathers over against their younger brethren - i. e., “all the Levitical houses enumerated drew lots in their courses on equal terms, the older families having no advantage over the younger ones.” As there were 24 courses of the priests, so we must suppose that there were 24 of the Levites, though the number of the families as given in the text 1 Chr. 23:7-23; 1Ch 24:20-30 is 25.”
How this psalm is built
The form: Administrative list, the priestly courses settled by lot and entered in a public record, as Barnes classes it.
The patterns in this chapter
| Device | What it does | Where to see it |
|---|---|---|
| The lot, named at the head, worked out in the middle and named again at the close | Verse 5 says the houses were divided by lot. Verses 7 to 18 run the lot out ordinal by ordinal. Verse 31 closes the chapter by stating the same method for the remaining Levites, with the family heads and their younger brothers alike. The chapter therefore argues its one point three times, at the start, in the working and at the end.Albert Barnes, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments, 1832 to 1869, on 1 Chronicles 24:31. | 1 Chronicles 24:5, 1 Chronicles 24:7, 1 Chronicles 24:31 |
| The twenty-four lots, each in its ordinal | Verses 7 to 18 give the courses as an unbroken ordinal run from the first to the twenty-fourth. The ordinal formula stands twenty-three times after the opening line, counted in the Berean text in the store. The two priestly houses are mixed through the run rather than kept apart, so a name's place carries no rank of honour.C. F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Books of Chronicles, 1872, on 1 Chronicles 24:7. | 1 Chronicles 24:7, 1 Chronicles 24:10, 1 Chronicles 24:18 |
| Sixteen against eight | Verse 4 states the imbalance plainly, sixteen heads of families from Eleazar and eight from Ithamar. Verse 6 then records that one family was taken from Eleazar and then one from Ithamar in turn. The text sets the unequal numbers beside an alternating draw and leaves the tension standing without explaining it.Albert Barnes, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments, 1832 to 1869, on 1 Chronicles 24:4. | 1 Chronicles 24:4, 1 Chronicles 24:6 |
| The second register, on the same method | Verses 20 to 30 repeat the family survey of chapter 23 for the remaining Levites under Amram, Izhar, Hebron, Uzziel and Merari. Albert Barnes counts twenty-five family heads here against the twenty-four priestly courses, one more than the pattern would predict, and the text gives no explanation.Albert Barnes, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments, 1832 to 1869, on 1 Chronicles 24:20. | 1 Chronicles 24:20, 1 Chronicles 24:26, 1 Chronicles 24:30 |
The historical value
10 more paragraphs on the patterns
The roster outlived the men in it. Luke 1:5 introduces Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, as a priest of the course of Abijah, which is the eighth lot at verse 10. The scene at the altar in Luke 1 therefore takes place during the turn of a division set here.
A few of the course names return after the exile. Jedaiah, Harim and Immer stand in Ezra's list of priests who came back, so the scheme served the second temple in reduced form.
The dossier on this book sets the courses of 1 Chronicles 23 to 26 against the Babylonian temple prebend records of the sixth to fifth centuries BC. They are the Eanna archive at Uruk and the Ebabbar archive at Sippar. Sanctuary staffs there were organised by family into rotating shares, with rosters kept and shares inherited. The dossier's verdict is that these courses look like what a working temple actually required, and that the parallel settles nothing about the date they were written down.
The debated concept
Verse 3 names Ahimelech of Ithamar's line beside Zadok. Some texts of Samuel name Abiathar rather than Ahimelech beside Zadok in David's day, and the commentators note the difference without resolving it. The page states the difference and gives no verdict.
The date of the book bears on how these lists are read, and the dossier's provenance section carries the question with its holders. An early Persian date of about 450 to 400 BC is held by H. G. M. Williamson in 1 and 2 Chronicles, New Century Bible Commentary, 1982, and by Martin Selman in 1 Chronicles, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, 1994. A late Persian or early Hellenistic date in the 300s BC is held by Sara Japhet, in I and II Chronicles, Old Testament Library, 1993. Gary Knoppers holds the same date in 1 Chronicles 1-9, Anchor Bible, 2003. The prebend parallel is held by both positions.
The divine connection
The lot is the chapter's whole argument. It is the instrument Proverbs 16:33 names for a decision God settles, and here it decides which house serves in which turn, with the large house and the small house bound by the same draw. Verse 5 states that there were officers of the sanctuary and officers of God among both lines, so the draw was between equals in office whatever their numbers.
The New Testament and the later church
Two uses stand. Luke 1:5 to 1:9 dates the announcement of John's birth by the turn of the course of Abijah, which is the eighth lot of this chapter. Acts 1:26 chooses Matthias by lot, the same instrument used here to settle a sacred office, and the commentators read the two passages together.
Keep studying
Sources for this chapter
The summary
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory; John Wesley, Notes on the Old Testament and Matthew Henry, Complete Commentary.
The form and classifications
Albert Barnes, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments, 1832 to 1869, on 1 Chronicles 24:5; C. F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Books of Chronicles, 1872, on 1 Chronicles 24:7; Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, 1710, on 1 Chronicles 24:4 and The dossier's ancient Near Eastern section on this book, src/components/book/dossier-content/1-chronicles.ts, the Eanna and Ebabbar entry.
The exposition
Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible; Albert Barnes; Bede, Homilies on the Gospels 2.19; Jamieson Fausset and Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible; Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible; John Gill; Keil, The Books of the Chronicles and Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible.