I always try to be careful to use the word "developed" rather than "evolved" in a context like this.
Here's why: we may construe "evolution" to mean that one thing supposedly becomes another thing quite dissimilar or entirely different, of a different species (or genus or phylum, or, by analogy, something a far cry from the original); but we understand "development" to mean something maturing, or unfolding from within according to a pattern that is already intrinsic.
Examples: A small ratlike mammal may supposedly "evolve" into a horse. (So they say.) But by contrast, given proper conditions, an embryo unequivocally "develops" into a neonate, a toddler, a teenager.
So I would say that the "presbyters" who ordained new "presbyters" (including young ones like Timothy) by the imposing of hands, were not conferring the spiritual gift of "oldness" or "elderliness," but conferring a "presbyter" status which was an early development of what we call priesthood.
Even in NT times, presbyter did not mean merely "elder" (think of youthful Timothy), nor were they conferring the Aaronic priesthood, but they were designating those who carried forward the new priesthood, the one priesthood of Christ.
This new Christ-priesthood is referred to in the New Testament (I Peter 2:5, 2:9, Rev 1:6, 5:9-10) as:
‘...a holy priesthood...’
‘...a royal priesthood...’
‘...a kingdom of priests...’
and
‘...a kingdom and priests...
This is also connected to the forgiveness of sins (via Christ's priesthood)--- carried forward into the Church as St. Paul explains: "To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ (2 Corinthians 2:10 KJV)
Not an evolution.
A development.
One you can see definitely beginning in the NT, and continuing in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, well before Constantine.
But what did 1st century presbyters do? The koine Greek had a word for priest (iereus) but didn't apply it to prebyters. By definition, a iereus is the one who offers sacrifices and sacred rites.
The root word ieros means that which is sacred or consecrated to deity, as in iera grammata, sacred scriptures (2 Tim 3:15), something that is revered.
No such thing was ascribed to presbyters. I don't think there is one single instance in the New Testament (which uses the word presbyter 49 times) where the priestly (i.e. consecrated rites) are ascribed to a presbyter.
This new Christ-priesthood is referred to in the New Testament (I Peter 2:5, 2:9...]
Yes, 1 Peter is a late 1st century or an early 2nd century book, and, more importantly, it is addressed to the Christians and not presbyters in particular, with a message that it's good and desirable to suffer (1 Pet 2:21), and that doing so will make them acceptably to God (1 Pet 2:20), a la Jesus style.
and in that act of consecration, an act of sacrificial offering, they indeed become both the ones offering the they become "the holy priesthood."
In the New Testament, we are all priests, offering a sacrifice of service and praise.
Rom 12:1 I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.
Phl 2:17 Even if I am to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.
Phl 4:18 I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God.
Hbr 13:15 Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name.
Hbr 13:16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.
1Pe 2:5 you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
What we do NOT see in the New Testament is any man offering an atoning sacrifice in the role of a priest.
“11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent ( not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. 18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.” - Heb 9
I realize Catholic doctrine puts a different spin on Hebrews, to put it mildly, but I think the standard Protestant interpretation does so using the plain meaning of the words. No one reading Hebrews would naturally conclude that Jesus is being continually offered in a perpetual sacrifice, or that there are priests in the church presenting his flesh and blood in an atoning sacrifice daily.
Sola Scriptura remains the great divide for Protestant and Catholic, for the latter cannot justify current practice without giving greater weight to traditions that followed hundreds or a thousand years of evolution. The current role of priests can only be justified by elevating tradition above scripture, which is implicit in using it to determine the meaning of scripture.