The Age of the Maccabees (Illustrated) (5 page)

The freedom from active
service in the field was, as might be expected, but temporary. The Jews’
inveterate enemies, Idumeans and the rest, were as hostile as ever. Judas
fortified Beth-zur, and rescued and brought to Judea many of his countrymen who
were suffering ill treatment at the hands of their heathen neighbors in Galilee
and Gilead or among the Ammonites andEdomites.

Lysias meanwhile,
probably from lack of money wherewith to pay mercenaries, left Judea to itself.
Antiochus failed in his Parthian expedition, and on his return died in Taba, a
Persian city, appointing his relative Philip guardian of his son Antiochus V
(Eupator). This appointment of a rival to Lysias (who already held the same
office) had the natural result of giving the final blow to the strength of the
Seleucid kingdom. Judas ventured under these circumstances to lay vigorous
siege to the citadel. Probably through the collusion of Hellenistic priests,
whom he had excluded from participation in his restoration of worship, those
who held the fortress, McNeal’s included, made their escape to Antioch, and
urged that strong measures should be taken by the king. Lysias, with his
youthful charge, accordingly laid siege to Beth-zur, which was the key of that
part of the country. The Sabbatical year (163 BC), in which there could be
neither sowing nor reaping, increased their difficulties, and the garrison was
reduced to surrender. Thereupon Judas went out to meet the Syrian troops at 
Beth-zachariah (between Jerusalem and Beth-zur), but his force, a mere handful
by comparison, in spite of prodigies of valor was driven back to Jerusalem, and
took refuge in the Temple precincts. Even these would have been carried by
assault, had not the advance of Lysias’s rival Philip upon Antioch compelled
the former to make terms with the Jews and withdraw. In the treaty thus
obtained they secured a promise of complete religious freedom, and although, in
spite of the terms of peace, the fortifications of the city were razed to the
ground, the people had at least gained through their leader the main object for
which they had for years been contending. Henceforward accordingly we may
observe that the char¬acter of the contest was altered. None of the successors
of Epiphanes attempted to overturn the Jewish religion by force. The struggle
was henceforward primarily within the nation, between the stricter and the
Hellenizing parties, the one or the other of them calling in the Syrian power
to their aid. Atpresent the national party were in possession. But presently
Demetrius (Soter), son of Seleucus IV (Philopator), and thus nephew of
Epiphanes, made his escape from Rome, slew his cousin Antiochus Eupator and
Lysias, and with the support of the Romans assumed the kingdom of Syria (162
BC). Menelaus had been put to death by Lysias, and Alcimus (or Jakim) named by
Demetrius as his successor. The new high priest, with other leaders of the
Hellenist party at Jerusalem, urged upon Demetrius that he should relieve them
from what they represented as the oppression of Judas Maccabeus. In reply to
their request, Bacchides was sent as general to carry out their demands.
Alcimus, as a lineal descendant of Aaron, as well as by the assurances which he
gave, had secured the support of the Assidean party, who, however, were taught
by his treacherous murder of sixty of their number that their allegiance was
misplaced. This and a further outrage on the part of the Syrian general
Bacchides had the effect of strengthening anew the party of Judas.Alcimus
sought additional help from Demetrius, who, in reply, sent Nicanor with a
com¬mission to take strong measures against the rebels. After a conference with
Judas, and complimentary speeches on the part of Nicanor, there followed a
battle at Capharsalama, and another at Adasa, in both of which the Syrian
forces were utterly routed.    On the latter occasion Nicanor himself fell.

Judas now, fearing the
vengeance of Demetrius, sent an embassy to the Roman Senate, who readily
tendered their support, in pursuance of their general policy to extend their
influence by taking up the cause of one of the parties to a dispute, and so
acquiring a footing from which to advance their own interests. In this case
their policy was doubtless influenced by their desire to adopt measures at once
easy and effective to keep up control over the power to which, in the days of
Epiphanes, they had administered so peremptory a cheek by the hand of Popilius
Laenas. Their order to Demetrius in pursuance of this treaty, that he should no
longer trouble the Jews, came too late. Only about two months after the death
of Nicanor, Bacchides, despatched to Judea, inflicted a crushing defeat at
Elasa upon Judas, who himself fell in the engagement, and was buried by
permission of the victors with his father at Modin.

After all, it is not to
be wondered at that even such a hero was unable to maintain his ground
permanently against a foe so overwhelmingly superior in numbers. His earlier
victories, surprising as they were, may be accounted for in part at least by
his powers in strategy. Never afterwards were the Jews successful against their
foes, except when the Syrians were themselves weakened by internal dissension.

GREAT as was the blank
left by the death of the chief leader among the Maccabean brothers, yet the
condition in which he left his countrymen was at any rate to be preferred to
that from which he had rescued them. Now, as we have said, there was no longer
a question of their being compelled to conform to idolatrous customs. Further,
they had gained a knowledge of what they could do in the way of resistance to a
foreign foe. Self-respect and self-reliance had been to some extent impressed
upon them by the victories which Judas had gained by a rare combination of
skill, courage, and enthusiastic confidence in his cause as being that of God.

Internal dissensions
were however rife, and there was no longer a sufficiently commanding
personality to overcome any of the evils of faction. The Assideans, the
Hellenists, and the adherents of the three surviving brothers of the Hasmonean
family, divided the nation. The first-named, narrow in their sympathies, had no
very definite views of policy, except to give a general support to the high
priest Alcimus; holding that his Aaronic descent sufficiently counterbalanced
his treachery towards them and his undoubtedly Syrian sympathies. The
Hasmoneans looked to the treaty which Rome, on the principle of obtaining a
hold on the weaker of the two  contending powers, had made  with Judas
Maccabeus.

The Hellenists
continued their former aims; they still held the citadel at Jerusalem, where
they proved a thorn in the side of their fellow-countrymen.

The sufferings of
famine were now added to intestine troubles, and it was evident that only by
the efforts of the Hasmonean party could any brighter future be looked for.
Jonathan, the present leader, was more of a politician than a general. His
brother Jochanan was slain in an attack by a hostile tribe, and Bacchides in the
course of a year practically reduced the country to submission to the Syrian
yoke. Alcimus, who, apparently with the object of giving the heathen access to
the Temple, had ordered the destruction of a line of demarcation which stood
between the inner and outer courts, was seized with paralysis and died, owing,
as the stricter Jews believed, to the wrath of heaven at his sacrilegious
purpose.

For some years (150—153
BC) the Jews were without a high priest, and Bacchides for the first two of
them left the country to itself, a circumstance of which Jonathan made good use
by seeking to improve his position for taking the offensive. This endeavor of
his so far succeeded, that, after a certain amount of strife with both
Hellenists and Syrian forces, the land had rest for five years.

But more striking
success was now in store, of a character that shows the powerful position which
the Maccabean leader had succeeded in acquiring. The Hellenizers evidently
failed to command the sympathies of any large number of the people. The
Assideans doubtless were in general accord with the party of Jonathan, and the
people over whom he presided at the end of those years of respite had a real
claim to be regarded as a united nation. The war of faction had been put down.

Jonathan’s supremacy
was conceded, and so apparent to Syria that the rivals for power were eager to
secure his support.

Balas, son of
Epiphanes, bore an extraordinary likeness to Antiochus Eupator, the late king
of Syria. He took the name of Alexander, and with the countenance of Attains of
Pergamum and Ptolemy Philometor of Egypt in his pretensions, as well as of the
Roman Senate, he claimed the Syrian throne. Demetrius, whose cruelties had
alienated his subjects, was alarmed, and wrote to secure Jonathan’s aid, “with
words of peace, so as to magnify him”. Balas, on the other hand, successfully
capped this attempt by a present of a purple robe and a golden crown; so that
he at once became prince in Judea and officiated as high priest at the Feast of
Tabernacles, 152 BC, the first of his family who had held that office.
Demetrius still endeavored to outbid his rival for Jewish support, and the
letter which he now wrote, preserved by Josephus, illustrates the extremely
severe character of the taxation which had been imposed by Syria. He says: “I
will remit you most of the taxes and contributions which ye paid to my
predecessors and myself ... I give you as a favor the value of the salt-tax and
the (golden) crowns which ye did bring to me, and my share, even one-third of
ground crops, and one-half of the fruit trees, I surrender from today. Also the
poll-tax paid by every inhabitant of Judea, viz., Samaria, Galilee, Perea, I
grant yon in perpetuity.” Among further concessions he promises honorable posts
in military service, a larger contribution  to  the  Temple  expenses, the
remission of the annual tax of 10,000 drachma paid by those who came to
sacrifice at Jerusalem, and that even Jews settled in Syrian provinces should
be exempt on all Sabbaths and festivals, and for three days before and after
the festivals, from being called before any court of justice.

Jonathan was prudently
deaf to these appeals. Alexander overthrew his rival, who was slain in the
battle, and Philometor offering to give the victor his daughter Cleopatra, the
marriage was celebrated at Ptolemais, Jonathan being present as a specially
honored guest. Jonathan's position henceforward was such that he was able to
aim at the extension of Jewish dominion by taking advantage of the political
condition of Syria, and obtaining, partly by demand, partly by conquest, such
concessions of power or territory as he desired. In the exercise of this
general policy he continued to support Alexander Balas when Demetrius II, son
of Demetrius I, set himself up (147 BC) as rival claimant for the throne, and
he more than once defeated Demetrius’sforces, and brought home rich booty. As
an acknowledgment of this service he acquired fromBalas Ekron and its
territory.

In 145 BC, however,
Demetrius obtained the throne with the help of Ptolemy, who transferred his
daughter Cleopatra from Balas to his rival. Jonathan at this time, trusting that
the Syrian forces were sufficiently employed, sought to obtain possession of
the citadel at Jerusalem, which still contained a Syrian garrison. Demetrius
hearing of this, summoned Jonathan to Ptolemais. The latter, however, was able
as a result of that interview to obtain his own confirmation in his dignities,
the promise for Judea of freedom from tribute, and the addition of the three
Samaritan provinces of Ephraim, Lydda, and Ramathaim—all this apparently on
condition that Jonathan should raise the siege of the citadel.

Antiochus VI, son of
Alexander Balas, was now brought forward by Trypho (the leader of some troops
whom Demetrius had disbanded) as rival king to Demetrius, and thereupon an
opportunity was furnished Jonathan to make still further demands as the price
of aid. Before, however, effect could be given to these, Demetrius was driven
from power, and Jonathan passed over to the side of the new ruler, taking the
field on his behalf, while at the same time he sent ambassadors to open up
friendly relations with Sparta, as well as to Rome to renew the treaty made in
the time of Judas. At this time also the city was refortified and a wall
erected so as to cut off the citadel effectually from the rest of Jerusalem. At
length, Trypho suspecting, and not without cause, that Jonathan was advancing
rapidly towards the step of casting off completely the Syrian suzerainty,
treacherously secured the person of the Jewish leader, and after a further
exhibition of successful craft in his dealings with Simon Maccabeus, who had
taken the command, caused Jonathan to be murdered at Bascama, and returned
home.

Simon, on his
succession to power (142 BC), reaped the benefit of his predecessor's skilful
policy and generalship. All that was needed was to obtain from Syria the
confirmation of the concessions made to Jonathan. These were readily granted by
Demetrius, who indeed had no power to refuse them, and Simon's position as an
independent prince was virtually conceded, though not perhaps in language
wholly free from ambiguity. He now proceeded to secure the fortress of Beth-zur
and Gazara. The latter was of special importance to obtain, as being on the
route between Jerusalem and Joppa, a town which was one of the most valuable
acquisitions made at this time, as its trading dues were a source of large
income to the Jewish commonwealth. Above all, he at last obtained possession of
the citadel itself, and demolished its forts, the Hellenists who occupied it
either withdrawing to Egypt, or accepting the new conditions of life in their
own country, or lastly, in some few cases where they were unwilling to yield,
being put to death for their idolatrous leanings. Public documents were dated
from the commencement of Simon’s reign (142 BC), as a new era, thus following
the example of neighboring independent states. Embassies sent by him to Sparta
and to Rome procured promises of friendship and support from both. Prosperity
prevailed throughout the land. According to the description of the Maccabean
historian, “Then they tilled their ground in peace, and the land gave her
increase, and the trees of the plains their fruit. The ancient men sat in the
streets, they communed all of them together of good things, and the young men
put on glorious and warlike apparel. He provided victuals for the cities, and
furnished them with all manner of munition, until the name of his glory was
named unto the end of the earth. He made peace in the land, and Israel rejoiced
with great joy: and they sat each man under his vine and his fig-tree, and there
was none to make them afraid: and there ceased in the land any that fought
against them: and the kings were discomfited in those days. And he strengthened
all those of his people that were brought low: the law he searched out, and
every lawless and wicked person he took away. He glorified the sanctuary, and
the vessels of the Temple he multiplied”. One more step was needed to crown the
position. The office of high priesthood had been held by Jonathan with the
permission of theSyrian power. Simon must assume it at the call of his own
nation, and this was done with all due pomp and ceremony in September 141 BC,
when it was resolved that Simon should be ecclesiastically, as well as in civil
and military affairs, supreme “for ever, until there should arise a faithful
prophet”. Brazen tablets recording the decree were set up in the Temple court.
The announcement of this solemn confirmation of the high priesthood in the
house of Joarib was made to the Jews resident in Egypt in a carefully worded
communication, having regard to the susceptibilities of men who had not only
set up a novel temple in their adopted country, but also had among them a
representative of the ancient high-priestly family of Jaddua.

Now that the
culmination had been reached, Simon, or rather, probably, the council of chief
men over whom he presided, proceeded to issue shekels and half-shekels with the
words (in old Hebrew characters) “Jerusalem the Holy” on one side, and on the
other, “shekel (or half-shekel) of Israel”, with the number of the year, dating
apparently from his consecration to the high priesthood. Emblems of his office
were added in the shape of a budding rod, and a cup suggesting incense. Simon’s
name does not occur on those extant, of which we have specimens of the years
(142—138 BC) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

After several years of
peace, during which Simon obtained the renewed expression of Roman goodwill—of
value less than doubtful, could men have foreseen the future—he was called upon
by Antiochus Sidetes (138 BC) to recognize his authority as successor to
Demetrius, who had been defeated and captured in the course of his Parthian
expedition. Sidetes, while the contest between himself and Demetrius’s general
Trypho was still doubtful, readily confirmed Simon in his independence and immunities.
As soon as that leader had been captured and put to death,Sidetes claimed the
restoration to Syria of the citadel in Jerusalem and other fortresses on
payment of suitable compensation, and followed up his claim by an appeal to
arms. Simon, now an old man, sent his sons, Judas and John, to meet the invader
between Modin and Ekron. The Syrians were vanquished, and Simon was left in
peace by Sidetes during the few remaining months of the Jewish prince’s life.
He and his sons, Mattathias and Judas, were treacherously slain at Jericho by
his son-in-law Ptolemy, son of Abubus, who had been appointed by Simon civil
and military governor of that district. Ptolemy's ambitious designs, which had
prompted him to this deed of violence, were unsuccessful. John, the sole
remaining son, was forewarned that Ptolemy's agents were approaching in order
to complete the murderous designs of their master. He hastened to Jerusalem,
where he received the support of the people, and succeeded to his father's
position (135 BC).