Читать книгу History of the Jews (Vol. 1-6) - Graetz Heinrich - Страница 28

Table of Contents

The Judæan Colonies in Egypt and Cyrene​—​Internal Affairs of the Alexandrian Community​—​King Philometor favours the Judæans​—​Onias and Dositheus​—​The Temple of Onias​—​Translation of the Pentateuch into Greek​—​Struggle between the Judæans and Samaritans in Alexandria​—​Affairs in Judæa​—​Independence of Judæa​—​Simon's League with the Romans​—​Overthrow of the Acra and of the Hellenists​—​Simon's Coinage​—​Quarrel between Simon and the Syrian King​—​Invasion by Cendebæus​—​Assassination of Simon.

160–135 B. C. E.

The magic land of the Nile, once the school of suffering of the children of Israel and the cradle of Israel's religion, became at this period the school of wisdom for the Judæan nation.

The settlement of the Judæans in Egypt was as much encouraged by the Greek rulers of that country as it had been in former ages by the Pharaohs. They spread over the entire district between the Lybian desert in the north and the confines of Ethiopia in the south. They increased as rapidly as they had done in the days of their forefathers, and they numbered one million of souls at the expiration of a century from their first arrival in their adopted country.

In Egypt and Cyrene the Judæans enjoyed rights similar to those of the Greek colonists. They were so proud of this equality that they watched over their privileges with a jealous eye. It is impossible to say from whom they originally held them, whether from Alexander or his successors. The Judæan colony in Egypt began to play an active part at the time when the Egyptian and Syrian courts were hostile to each other, when both were eager for the possession of Judæa, and each was, therefore, anxious to secure the alliance of the Judæans. But the Egyptian Judæans had always been faithful adherents of the Ptolemaic royal house, and Philometor, the sixth prince of that dynasty, had cordially received the numerous fugitives who had fled from Judæa during the persecutions of Antiochus.

Conspicuous amongst those emigrants were several Judæans of distinguished families, as well as the son of the high-priest Onias. They were treated with respect by the Egyptian rulers, and were able, at a later date, to give proof of their intelligence and their learning. Political prudence demanded the friendliest reception of the Judæan malcontents, in order to make sure of their undivided support in the re-conquest of Judæa from Syria. Neither Egypt nor Syria, however, could possibly have divined that the opposition of the Judæan patriots to the Syrian armies would lead to the independence of Judæa.

The Judæans were principally concentrated in Alexandria, second only to Rome in political importance and commerce, and to Athens in love of art and knowledge. Of the five divisions or districts of Alexandria, which were designated by the first letters of the Greek alphabet, the Judæans occupied nearly the whole of two; the district of the Delta, lying upon the sea-coast, had indeed become an exclusively Judæan colony, and its commanding position determined the occupation of its inhabitants. The cargoes of grain that Rome imported for her legions from the rich plains of Egypt were undoubtedly laden upon Judæan ships, and taken into the market by Judæan merchants. They carried the wealth of Egyptian harvests to less fertile countries, as Joseph, their ancestor, had done before them. Prosperity and refinement were the fruits of their enterprise. But commerce was not monopolised by the Judæans, nor was it their only pursuit. Their eagerness to learn and their aptitude enabled them to acquire the skill of the Greeks, and to succeed in the manufacture of delicate fabrics. Judæan artisans and skilled workmen were leagued in a kind of guild, and when labour was required in the Temple of Jerusalem, the Alexandrian-Judæan community supplied the master-hands. Moreover, the Alexandrian Judæans applied themselves to the Grecian arts of war and of statecraft. They acquired the melodious Greek tongue, and made a profound study of Greek learning, many of them reading and understanding Homer and Plato as easily as the books of Moses and the writings of King Solomon.

Prosperity, worthy pursuits, and culture inspired the Alexandrian Judæans with dignity and self-respect, and in this they may be compared with their descendants in Spain of a much later date.

The Alexandrian community was looked upon as the centre of the Judæan colony in Egypt, and other Judæan colonies, and even Judæa herself, were glad to lean at times upon this firm pillar of Judaism. Houses of prayer, bearing the name Proseuche, were established in all parts of the city. Amongst them was the principal synagogue, distinguished by its graceful architecture and its magnificent interior. These houses of prayer were at the same time schools of learning, where the most accomplished student of the Law would stand up on Sabbaths and festival days to expound that portion of the Pentateuch that had just been read to the congregation.

But the most brilliant ornaments of the Alexandrian-Judæan world were the distinguished fugitives who arrived in Alexandria during the Syrian persecutions. The most illustrious of these was Onias IV., the youngest son of the last legitimate high-priest of the line of Joshua ben Jozadak.

After his father had been treacherously murdered, on account of his determined antagonism to the Hellenists and his support of Hyrcanus, young Onias fled for safety to Egypt. There he was kindly received by the gentle King Philometor, because he represented a party which looked upon him as the rightful successor to the priestly dignity, and the sixth Ptolemy, hoping ultimately to wrest Cœlesyria and Judæa from Syrian rule, believed that he might eventually rely upon the support of this party.

As soon as Onias, who had now reached man's estate, heard that the wicked high-priest, Menelaus, had been slain by order of the Syrian court, and that Prince Demetrius had escaped from Rome, and had conquered Syria, he flattered himself that he would be allowed to return as high-priest to Judæa. His protector, the king Philometor, had meanwhile become an ally of Demetrius, and had probably put in a good word for his favourite. But when Alcimus was chosen high-priest, and was supported by an armed force, even against the Hasmonæans, Onias gave up all hope of receiving the priestly inheritance of his father, and took up his permanent abode in Egypt.

Onias seems to have been accompanied by a man of great distinction, Dositheus by name, and the two men played an influential part during the reign of Philometor. They were given the opportunity of distinguishing themselves during the disorders arising from the rivalry of the two royal brothers, the gentle Philometor and the violent Euergetes, who was a monster in body and in mind, and who was called, on account of his enormous size, "Fat-paunch" (Physcon), and on account of his diabolical wickedness, "Kaker-getes."

The two brothers, with their sister Cleopatra, who was the wife of her elder brother, claimed the throne at a period when Egypt and Syria happened to be at war with each other. But Physcon, the younger brother, had seized the throne for himself, supplanting the elder one, who fled as a supplicant to Rome. The Roman Senate acknowledged the rights of Philometor, but always greedy for an extension of power, resolved to make use of this opportunity to weaken Egypt. It decreed, therefore, that the north-western province of Cyrene should be separated from the Egyptian kingdom, and placed under the rule of Physcon. But this prince, dissatisfied with his small territory, repeatedly conspired against Philometor, and the two brothers were soon openly at variance. Philometor dared defy Rome, which had taken Physcon's part; but unfortunately his soldiers were unreliable; for the Alexandrian-Greek population, besides having the usual faults of the Greeks, were remarkable for faithlessness and caprice. Still more did Philometor lack commanders. In this hour of emergency he entrusted the Judæan emigrants, Onias and Dositheus, with the command of the campaign against his brother. The entire Jewish-Egyptian population stood by Philometor. The ability of the two Judæan leaders enabled him to weaken Physcon effectually. From that day Onias and Dositheus were held in great favour by Philometor, and they remained commanders of the entire army.

Onias was recognised by the Judæans as head, or prince of the race (Ethnarch). He may have been unanimously elected to that office by his countrymen, and confirmed in it out of gratitude by the king, or Philometor may have taken the initiative, and raised him to this dignity.

In time this office became a very important one. It was the duty of the ethnarch to control all the affairs of the community, to exercise the duties of a judge, and to protect the integrity of contracts. He represented his people at court. The office of ethnarch, which Onias was the first to hold, offered too many privileges to the Egyptian Judæans for them to have objected to it.

As a result, they were now in the fortunate position of having a leader of royal dignity who was able to mould them into one strong body. Their strength was to be enhanced by a new creation amongst them. In spite of the distinction which Onias enjoyed at the court of Philometor, and amongst his own race, he could not forget that, on account of the events that had taken place in Judæa, he had lost his rightful office of high-priest.

During the uncertain state of things in his own country, when Alcimus was raised above the rightful incumbents of the priesthood, and after his death, when this dignity seemed extinct, Onias conceived the idea of building a Temple in Egypt that should take the place of the violated sanctuary in Jerusalem, and of which he would be the rightful high-priest.

Was he prompted to such an undertaking by piety or ambition? The innermost workings of the heart are not revealed in history. To secure the approval of the Judæans, Onias referred to a prophecy of Isaiah xix. 19, "On that day there will be an altar to the Lord in Egypt." Philometor, to whom he expressed his wish, out of gratitude for his military services, presented him with a tract of land in the region of Heliopolis, four and a-half geographical miles north-east of Memphis, in the land of Goshen, where the descendants of Jacob had once lived until the exodus from Egypt. In the small town of Leontopolis, on the ruins of a heathen temple, where animals had formerly been worshipped, Onias built the Judæan sanctuary (154–152). Outwardly, it did not exactly resemble the Temple of Jerusalem, for it was made of brick, and it rose in the shape of a tower. But all the necessary appliances in the interior were on the exact model of those in Jerusalem, except that the seven-armed candlestick was replaced by a golden lamp hanging from a golden chain. Priests and Levites who had fled from the persecutions in Judæa, officiated in this Temple of Onias. The king generously decreed that the revenues of the whole district of Heliopolis should be devoted to the needs of the Temple and the priests. This small province was formed into a little priestly state, and was called Onion.

Although the community looked upon the Temple of Onias as their religious centre, visiting it during the festivals, and sacrificing in its courts, still, unlike the Samaritans, they did not withdraw their allegiance from the sanctuary of Jerusalem, or in any way depreciate it; on the contrary, they venerated Jerusalem as their sacred metropolis, and the Temple as a divine residence. But the wonderful fulfilment of the prophetic words, that "in Egypt a temple of the Lord should arise," was a source of great pride to them. They called Heliopolis the "City of Justice" (Ir-hazedek), applying to it this verse from the prophets, "Five Egyptian cities will at that day recognise the God of Israel, and one of them will be called the City of Heres," but they read Ir-ha-Zedek.

Had Judæa been enjoying a state of peace and prosperity, she would have resented this innovation, and laid an interdict upon the Temple of Onias, as she had done upon that of Gerizim, and the Egyptian-Judæan congregation would have been excluded from the community, as had been the case with the Samaritans. But the desolation of the Temple in Jerusalem was so great, the dismemberment of the commonwealth so complete, that there could have been no valid reason for preventing the accomplishment of a design springing from the purest of intentions. The founder of the Temple was descended from a long line of high-priests, which had its origin in the days of David and Solomon. His forefathers had been instrumental in rebuilding the Temple after the Babylonian exile; he could claim Simon the Just as his ancestor, and his father was the pious Onias III. Later, when the Hasmonæan high-priest had restored the divine service in Jerusalem, in all its purity, the Judæans of the mother-country looked with regret upon the Temple that existed in a foreign land, and the uncompromisingly pious party never could forget that its existence was in violation of the Law. But by that time the Temple of Onias had become firmly established.

Philometor gave Onias permission to build a fortress for the protection of the Temple, in the province of Onion, and placed the stronghold and its garrison under his command. Onias was at the same time military commander of the district of Heliopolis, called the Arabian province; hence his title Arabarch. In Alexandria, Onias was the communal and judicial head of the Jewish population resident there, while in the province of Onion and Arabian Egypt he was commander of the Judaic soldiery settled there.

The complete confidence that this king reposed in Onias and his co-religionists induced him to raise the high-priest to another post of importance. The seaports and the mouths of the Nile were of the greatest moment for the collection of the royal revenues. The taxes here levied on all incoming and outgoing raw materials and manufactured goods made Egypt the richest country during the rule of the Ptolemies, and later, under that of the Romans. Onias was entrusted with the custody of the ports, and the Alexandrian Judæans living upon the sea-coast had, no doubt, the privilege of selecting the officials for the custom-houses.

At this period, Egypt was the scene of an event of the utmost importance in the history of the world, though giving rise at the time to views diametrically opposed to each other. The devotion of the Judæan fugitives to the Law, for whose sake they had fled from their homes in Palestine, may have awakened in the cultivated King Philometor the desire to become acquainted with the time-honored Torah of Moses; or perhaps those Judæans, who were allowed access to the person of the king, so stimulated his interest in their laws, so shamefully reviled by Antiochus Epiphanes, that Philometor was at last eager to read them for himself in a translation.

It is also possible that the insulting libel on the Judæans and their origin, written in the Greek tongue, apparently by an Egyptian priest, Manetho, (who describes the Israelites as being a noted shepherd race in Egypt (Hyksos), expelled as leprous under a leader called Moyses), may have made the king anxious to learn the history of that people from its own sources. Whatever was the nature of the inducement, it was a matter of great importance to the Alexandrian Jews that the sublime Pentateuch was translated into the polished Greek tongue.

We have no particulars of the way in which this work was brought about. Apparently, with a view to lightening the task, it was divided among five interpreters, so that each book of the Pentateuch had its own translator. The existing translation, though through various corruptions it has lost much of its original character, shows by its very lack of uniformity that it could not have issued from one pen.

The Greek translation of the Torah was, so to say, another sanctuary erected to the glory of God in a foreign land. The accomplishment of this task filled the Alexandrian and Egyptian Judæans with intense delight; and they thought, with no little pride, that now the vainglorious Greeks would at last be obliged to concede that the wisdom taught by Judaism was at once more elevating and of more ancient date than the philosophy of Greece. Their satisfaction was doubtless enhanced by the fact that the noble work owed in part its successful termination to the warm sympathy of the friendly king, and that a path was thus opened for a true appreciation of Judaism among the Greeks. It was natural, therefore, that great rejoicings should take place among the Egyptian Judæans on the day of presentation of the version to the king, and that its anniversary should be observed as a holiday. On that day it was customary for the Judæans to repair to the Island of Pharos, where they offered up prayers of joyful thanksgiving. After the religious ceremony they partook of a festive repast, either in tents or under the free vault of heaven, each according to his means. Later on this anniversary became a national holiday, in which even the heathen Alexandrians took part.

But far different was the effect produced by the translation of the Torah into Greek upon the pious inhabitants of Judæa. Not only was Greece the object of their hatred, on account of the sufferings they had endured at her hands, and the indignities she had offered to their religion; but they feared, not unnaturally, that the Law, translated into another language, might be exposed to disfigurement and misapprehension. The Hebrew language, in which God had revealed Himself upon Mount Sinai, alone appeared to them a worthy medium of the Divine thought. Presented in a new garb, Judaism itself appeared to the pious Judæans estranged and profaned. Consequently the day that was celebrated as a festival by the Judæans in Egypt was considered by their brethren in Judæa as a day of national calamity, similar to that upon which the golden calf had been worshipped in the desert, and it is even said that this day was numbered amongst their fasts.

Different as were the points of view from which the work was regarded, judged by the results produced by the Greek translation, there was reason both for the joy of the Alexandrian and the sorrow of the Palestinean Judæans. Thanks to its Grecian garb, Judaism became known to the Greeks, who were the civilisers of the world; and before five centuries had elapsed, the principal nations had become acquainted with its teachings. The Greek translation was the first apostle Judaism sent forth to the heathen world to heal it of its perversity and godlessness. Through its means the two opposing systems—the Judæan and the Greek—were drawn nearer together. Owing to their subsequent circulation through the world by means of the second apostle, Christianity, the tenets of Judaism were fused into the thought and language of the various nations, and at present there is no civilised language which has not, by means of this Greek translation, taken words and ideas from Judæan literature. Thus Judaism was introduced into the literature of the world, and its doctrines were popularised.

On the other hand, however, it innocently led to a mistaken view of the Judæan Law, becoming in a measure a false prophet, promulgating errors in the name of God. The difficulty of translating from Hebrew into Greek, a radically different language, at no time an easy task, was greatly increased at that period by the want of exact knowledge of Hebrew, and of the true nature of Judaism, which made it impossible for the translator always to render correctly the sense of the original. Moreover, the Greek text was not so carefully guarded but that, from time to time, arbitrary emendations might have been introduced. Added to this, the translation was probably used as a guide for the interpreter on the Sabbaths and Holy Days, and it depended upon his taste, learning, and discretion to make what changes he pleased. And, in fact, the Greek text is full of additions and so-called emendations, which later on, in the time of the conflicts between Judaism and Christianity, became still more numerous, so that the original form of the translation cannot always be recognised in its present altered state. Nevertheless the Alexandrian Judæans of later generations believed so firmly in the perfection of this translation, that by degrees they deemed that the original could be dispensed with, and depended entirely upon the translation. Thus they came to look upon the mistakes which had crept into the Greek Bible either through ignorance, inability to cope with grammatical difficulties, or arbitrary additions, as the word of God, and things were taught in the name of Judaism which were entirely foreign or even contrary to it. In a word, all the victories which Judaism gained during the lapse of years over civilised heathendom, as well as all the misconstructions which it suffered, were the effects of this translation.

The great estimation in which this work was held by the Greek-speaking Judæans, and in time also by the heathens, gave rise to legendary glorifications, which were finally, about a century later, crystallised in a story which relates that the origin of the translation was due to the steps taken by Ptolemy Philadelphus, whose attention had been attracted to the value of the Book of the Law by his librarian Demetrius. Demetrius declared it worthy of a place in the Royal Library, provided it were translated into Greek. Thereupon the king sent his ambassadors to the high-priest Eleazar with costly presents, requesting him to choose several wise men, equally versed in Hebrew and in Greek, and to bid them repair to his court. The high-priest selected seventy-two learned men, taking representatives from the twelve tribes, six from each, and sent them to Alexandria, where they were received with great pomp by the king. The seventy-two delegates finished the translation of the Torah in seventy-two days, and read it aloud before the king and all the assembled Judæans. It was from this legend, looked upon till recently as an historical fact, that the translation received the name of the Seventy-two, or more briefly, of the Seventy, Septuagint.

A beginning having been made, it was natural that a desire should arise to render the other literature of Judaism accessible to Greek readers, and so, by degrees, the historical books of the Jews also appeared in a Grecian garb. On account of the greater difficulties they offered, the poetical and prophetical books were the last ones to find their way to the Greek world. These translations gave birth to a new art in the Egyptian community—that of pulpit oratory. Was it, perhaps, customary in Judæa, when the Law was read, not only to translate the portion into the language then in use among the people (the Chaldæan or Aramæan), but also to explain it for the benefit of the ignorant, and was this practice also introduced into the houses of prayer of the Egyptian Judæans? Or was it adopted by the latter because the Hebrew language had become foreign to them? However, whether it was an imitation or whether it originated with the Egyptian Judæans, this custom of translating and explaining obscure verses and portions not easily understood created a new art. The interpreters, with the fluency of speech derived from their work, were not satisfied with merely rendering the original text, but expanded it, adding reflections thereon, and drawing from it applications to contemporary events, and notes of admonition and warning. Thus out of the explanation of Scripture arose the sermon, which, in the Greek spirit of giving to all things an attractive and beautiful form, came by degrees artistically to be developed. Pulpit oratory is the child of the Alexandrian-Judæan community. It was born in its midst, it grew up and was perfected, becoming later a model for other nations.

The charm which the Hellenistic Judæans found in the Biblical writings, now made accessible to them, awoke among the learned the desire to treat of those writings themselves, to bring to light the doctrines contained in them, or to clear up their apparent crudities and contradictions. Thus arose a Judæo-Greek literature, which spread and bore fruit, influencing an ever-widening circle. But little is known of the infancy of this peculiar literature which held, as it were, two such repellent nationalities in close embrace. That literature appears also to verify past experience, that rhythmic and measured sentences are more pleasing than simple prose. There are still some fragments of these writings extant which relate, in Greek verse, the old Hebrew history. This literary activity re-awakened in Egypt the old anger of the Samaritans against the Judæans. These two peoples agreeing in their adherence to the Law, in their recognition of one God, and in their condemnation of idolatry, still retained their old hatred against each other. Although the Samaritans, like the Jews, were forced by the officers of Antiochus to renounce the worship of the God of Israel, yet they did not assist the Judæans to fight their common enemy, but rather sided with the latter against their own co-religionists.

During the religious persecutions many Samaritans appear to have emigrated into Egypt, and to have joined the descendants of their own tribe who had been established there since the time of Alexander. These Egyptian Samaritans had, like the Judæans, adopted the customs and the language of the Greeks which prevailed in Egypt, and now the enmity which had existed between the adherents of Jerusalem and of Gerizim was transferred to a foreign land, where they opposed each other with that furious zeal which co-religionists in a strange country are wont to exhibit in support of cherished traditions. The translation of the Torah into Greek, under the patronage of the king Philometor, appears to have cast the firebrand into their midst. How fiercely must the anger of the Samaritans have been provoked by the omission in the text of the Septuagint of that verse which they looked upon as a proof of the sanctity of their Temple, "Thou shalt build an altar in Gerizim"! The Samaritans in Alexandria desired to make a protest against the translation, or rather against the alleged falsification, of the text, and as some of their number were in favour at court, they induced the mild Philometor to appoint a conference between the two religious sects, at which the question of the superior sanctity of the Samaritan or of the Judæan Temple should be decided. This was the first religious dispute held before a temporal ruler. The two parties chose the most learned men among them as their advocates. On the side of the Judæans appeared a certain Andronicus, the son of Messalam, whilst the Samaritans had two champions, Sabbai and Theodosius. In what manner the religious conference was carried on, and what its consequences were, cannot now be ascertained, the accounts that have come down to us having assumed a legendary form; each party claimed the victory, and both exaggerated its effects. Religious disputations have never yet achieved any real results. The Judæan historians pretend that an arrangement had been made to the effect that it should be the right and the duty of the king to put to death those who were defeated in argument—a statement for which there is no foundation. When the Jewish advocates pointed out the long roll of high-priests from Aaron down to their own time who had officiated in the Temple at Jerusalem, and how that Temple had been enriched by holy gifts from the kings of Asia,—advantages and distinctions which the Temple at Gerizim could not boast, the Samaritans were publicly declared to be vanquished, and according to agreement they were put to death. The Samaritan accounts, which are of a much later date and more confused, ascribe the victory to their side.

This controversy respecting the superior sanctity of Jerusalem or Shechem was, it appears, carried on in Greek verse. A Samaritan poet, Theodotus, praised the fertility of the country round Shechem, and in order to magnify the importance of that city he related the story of Jacob, describing how he rested there; also the ill-usage which his daughter Dinah received from the young nobles of Shechem, and the revenge taken upon them by her brothers, Simeon and Levi. In opposition to Theodotus, a Judæan poet, Philo the Elder, exalted the greatness of Jerusalem in a poem. He extolled the fertility of the Judæan capital, and spoke of its ever-flowing subterranean waters, which were conducted through channels from the spring of the High Priest. The poet endeavoured to enhance the sanctity of the Temple in Jerusalem, which stood on Mount Moriah, on the summit of which Abraham had been about to offer up his son Isaac—an act which shed everlasting glory upon all his descendants.

Meanwhile, the sky which, during the reign of Philometor, had shone so brightly over the Judæans in Alexandria, became dark and threatening. It seemed as if the parent state and its offshoot were linked together for good or evil. Prosperous and adverse days appeared to visit the two communities almost in the same alternation. Through the misfortune of Jonathan, Judæa had fallen into adversity, and a new reign in Egypt had brought trouble and sorrow to the Judæans in Alexandria. That same Ptolemy VII. (Physcon), who had reigned many years with Philometor and had conspired to destroy him, sought, after his death, to obtain the crown in spite of the existence of a rightful heir. The novelty-loving, fickle and foolish populace of Alexandria was inclined to recognise as king the deformed and wicked Physcon. The widowed queen, Cleopatra, who had governed during her son's minority, had likewise many adherents, and in particular Onias was devoted to her cause. When war broke out between Cleopatra and her hostile brother, Onias with his Judæan army received as their share of the spoil one district or province. At last a compromise was effected, in virtue of which Physcon was to marry his sister, and both were to reign together. This doubly incestuous marriage was most unhappy. No sooner had the inhuman Physcon entered Alexandria than he put to death, not only the followers of the rightful heir, but also the youth himself, who was slain on the very day on which Physcon married Cleopatra. Bitter enmity between king and queen, brother and sister, was the consequence of this cruel deed. The sensual and barbarous monster violated his wife's daughter, and filled Alexandria with terror and bloodshed, causing the greater part of the inhabitants to flee from the city. Was it likely that he would spare the Judæans who, as he well knew, were the supporters of his hated sister and wife? Having heard that Onias was bringing an army to her assistance, he ordered his soldiers to seize all the Judæans in Alexandria, with their wives and their children, and to cast them bound and naked upon a public place, to be trampled to death by elephants. The animals were intoxicated with wine in order to irritate and excite them against their helpless victims. But the latter were rescued from impending death in a manner which seemed miraculous to the trembling, unhappy Judæans. The enraged beasts rushed to the side where the king's people were seated awaiting the cruel spectacle, and many of them were killed, while the Judæans were unhurt. The Alexandrian Judæans kept the day of their heaven-sent deliverance as a perpetual memorial. From this time, indeed, Physcon appears to have left the Judæans unmolested. Indeed, during the remainder of his reign their literary ardour and their zeal for the acquisition of knowledge increased greatly, and their writers appear to have applied themselves undisturbed to their works. Physcon himself was an author, and wrote memoirs and memorabilia, dealing with historical events and facts in natural history. A Judæan called Judah Aristobulus is said to have been his or his brother's master.

Whilst the Alexandrian-Judæan community was occupying a high intellectual position, the Judæan people in their own land attained a lofty political eminence, from which they could look proudly back on their former abject state. What progress they had made during the reign of Jonathan is clearly shown by the simple comparison of their condition after his death, with that in which they found themselves at the fall of Judas. Judas's successor at first had been able to draw around him only a handful of faithful followers; a leader without right or title, he possessed neither fortresses, nor means of defence or attack, and was hard pressed by enemies at home and abroad. Jonathan's successor, on the contrary, Simon Tharsi, the last of the heroic sons of Mattathias, inheriting a recognised title, and being invested with the dignity of high-priest, became at once the ruler of a powerful people. He found strong fortresses in the land, and but one enemy in his path, who had already been much weakened by his predecessor. Jonathan's death, therefore, was followed by no disastrous results to the nation, but served to inflame the whole people to avenge the noble Hasmonæan high-priest upon his crafty murderer. Simon had simply to step into the vacant leadership. Although approaching old age at the time when he became the leader of his people, he still possessed the freshness of youth and the fiery courage which marked him when his dying father directed him to be the wise counsellor in the then impending war against Syrian despotism. So vigorous was the Hasmonæan race that few indeed of their members could be accused of cowardice or weakness, and the greater number of them evinced till their last breath the strength and courage of youth. By the side of Simon stood his four sons, Jonathan, Judah, Mattathias, and one whose name is unknown, who had all been moulded into warriors by the constant fighting in which they had been engaged. Simon, following the policy of his brothers, took advantage of the weakness of the enemy to increase the defences and strength of his country, and to extend the dominion of Judæa; but he achieved even more, for he delivered his people completely from Syrian rule and raised Judæa to the rank of an independent nation. Simon's government, which lasted almost nine years, was therefore rightly described as glorious. The aged were allowed to enjoy their closing days in peace, while the young rejoiced in the exercise of their activity and strength; "they sat every one under his vine and fig tree, with none to make them afraid."

Simon's first step was an act of independence. Without waiting, as had been the custom hitherto, for the confirmation of the Syrian princes, he accepted at once the office of high-priest offered him by the people. To provide against the war which this step of his might bring on, he hastened to provision and place in a state of defence the fortresses of Judæa. He also opened negotiations with the dethroned king Demetrius II., although the latter had repaid Jonathan's assistance with base ingratitude. Simon sent him, through a solemn embassy, a golden crown as an acknowledgment of his regal power, and promised him aid against Tryphon on condition that the independence of Judæa should be fully recognised by a complete release from payment of taxes and services. The result justified his calculations. Demetrius willingly accepted Simon's offer, hoping to assure himself of a faithful ally, who would assist him in a possible war against Tryphon. He wrote "to the high-priest and Friend of the King, to the elders and the people of Judæa," as follows: "We have received the golden crown which you have sent us, and we are ready to make a lasting treaty of peace with you, and to write to our administrators that we remit your taxes. What we have granted you shall remain yours. The fortresses that you have erected shall be yours. We give you absolution for all the offences, intentional as well as unintentional, that you have committed against us up to this day; we release you from the crown which you owe us, and we remit the taxes that were laid on Jerusalem. If there be any among you anxious and fit to enter our army, they may be enlisted, and let there be peace between us." The day on which this immunity had been granted was considered by the Judæans so important and valued an era, that its date, the 27th of Iyar (May), was recorded among the half-holidays commemorative of victory.

The people looked upon these concessions of Demetrius as the inauguration of their independence, and from that epoch the customary manner of counting time according to the years of the reigning Syrian king was discontinued. They now reckoned from the date of Simon's accession to the government. All legal documents of the year 142 were dated "In the first year of Simon, the High-Priest, Commander of the Army and Prince of the Nation." Confident of their strength, the people anticipated this royal prerogative for their leader, who was not at that time entitled to it, for he had as yet been recognised as the legitimate prince neither by Syria nor by the nation. Simon himself does not appear to have looked upon the concessions received as sufficient to bestow complete independence upon his country, but dated his reign from a later year, when he obtained the right of coining money. The joy experienced by the inhabitants of Jerusalem at the recovery of their freedom, the loss of which they had bitterly bewailed since the destruction of the Judæan kingdom under their last king Zedekiah, was so great that the elders or members of the Great Council felt impelled to communicate the all-important event to the Judæans in Egypt. In doing so, however, they had to overcome a serious difficulty: so to word their communication as not to offend Onias, the founder of the Onias Temple, the descendant of the family of high-priests which, by the acts of the Hasmonæans in Judæa, had been completely and hopelessly supplanted. Even supposing that Onias or his sons had entirely relinquished the prospect of ever possessing the office of high-priest, it must have been painful to remind them, and their followers in Egypt, that their family had been thrust aside by the people in Judæa.

The representatives of the nation managed to pass lightly over this difficult subject, and descanted upon the fact that, after their long sufferings and persecutions, God had heard their prayer, and had once more given them the power of offering sacrifices, of rekindling the holy lights, and of placing the shew-bread in the Temple, which had been spoiled by the enemy and polluted by the shedding of innocent blood. This delicate statement, which carefully avoided giving any offence to the Judæans in Egypt, appears to have produced a very favourable impression upon them. They likewise rejoiced at the recovered independence of Judæa, and ascribed great importance to the year in which it was obtained.

The second noteworthy act of Simon consisted in driving out the remaining Hellenists from their various hiding-places in the Acra at Jerusalem, and in the fortresses of Gazara and Bethsur, and in completely destroying any influence they may have possessed. Gazara surrendered unconditionally. Simon allowed the Hellenists to leave the place, and ordered their dwellings to be cleared of their idolatrous images. The Hellenists in the Acra, however, had fortified their position so well that Simon was obliged to lay siege to it, and to reduce its defenders by famine. At last they were overcome, and the victors entered the Acra to the sound of music and with solemn hymns of praise. In commemoration of the taking of the Acra, the 23rd Iyar (May 17) was ordered thenceforth to be kept as a day of rejoicing. The taking of Bethsur appears to have caused little difficulty. Of the expelled Hellenists, some, it seems, found refuge in Egypt, others renounced their idolatrous practices, and were again received into the community, whilst those who remained unchanged fell victims to the religious zeal of the conquerors. It is related that the 22nd Elul (September) was set apart among the days of victory, because it saw the death of those idolators who had allowed the respite of three days to elapse without returning to their faith. Thus at length disappeared the last vestiges of that party which, during nearly forty years, had shaken the foundations of Judaism, and which, in its apostate zeal, had called down upon the people the calamities of civil contests and cruel religious persecution, and brought a country to the verge of ruin. The fortresses which Simon had taken from the Hellenists, Bethsur and Gazara, were remodelled, so as to serve as places of defence. Of great importance, likewise, was the capture of Joppa (Jaffa), by the acquisition of which seaport the State received a large revenue; the export and import duties, which the Syrian kings had introduced, now fell to the share of Judæa.

The Acra underwent a peculiar change at the hands of the last of the Hasmonæan brothers. The wrath of the people against this fortress was too intense to allow of its standing intact. Apart from political considerations, there was also a religious sentiment adverse to its continuing unaltered. The fortress, with its lofty towers, which the Syrians had erected to keep the city in check, overtopped the Temple-capped mount itself, and this was not to be. According to the prophecies of Isaiah, "in the last days the Mountain of the House of the Lord was to be established on the top of the mountains, and be exalted above the hills." This was literally explained to mean that no mount or building was to overtop the Temple, and Simon, even if unconvinced himself, was obliged to bow to that belief. On the other hand, however, it seemed imprudent to destroy a fortress which, like the Acra, was so conveniently situated for the accommodation of troops, and so well fitted to serve as a storehouse for arms. Simon and his counsellors hit upon a middle course in dealing with it. The towers and bastions of the fortress were taken down—a work of destruction which, it is said, it cost the people three years to accomplish; the walls, courts and halls, on the contrary, were left standing, but the hated name of Acra or Acrapolis was no longer used, but changed for that of Birah (Baris), which had first been introduced by Nehemiah. In this transformed edifice the Judæan soldiers were quartered, and there they kept their weapons. Simon himself dwelt in the Birah in the midst of his soldiers, while his son Johanan (John), as governor of the sea-coast, resided at Gazara.

In spite of the favourable position in which he found himself, Simon was obliged to remain armed and prepared for war. At present the two pretenders to the throne, whilst they weakened each other, left him in peace. Demetrius II. (Nicator), who had granted independence to Judæa, was now engaged in an adventurous expedition in the east against Persia. His brother, Antiochus Sidetes, governed in his place, and was at strife with Diodotus Tryphon, who, having treacherously killed Jonathan and the young Antiochus, the son of Alexander Balas, had made himself ruler over Syria. Simon, urged by political motives to weaken this cunning, evil-minded enemy, assisted Antiochus Sidetes, and received from him the confirmation of the privileges granted to Judæa by his brother in the hour of his need. In addition thereto, Antiochus gave Simon the right of coining money, which was the especial mark of independence.

Unfortunately, as is but too often the case, the hand that planted the tree of liberty, also placed the gnawing worm in the noble blossom. Wanting as he was in that far-sightedness which belonged to the genius of the prophets of old, and guided only by present emergencies, Simon believed that he would ensure the hard-won independence of his country if he obtained for it the protection of that people which, never tired of making conquests and aggrandising itself, was constantly and everywhere the foe of liberty. In order to put an end to the ceaseless provocations given by the petty Syrian tyrants, Simon entrusted the welfare of his country to the mighty tyrant, Rome, in whose close embraces the nations that sought protection were unfailingly suffocated. Simon despatched as delegates Numenius, the son of Antiochus, and Antipater, the son of Jason. They carried with them a heavy golden shield and a golden chain, which, in the hope of gaining for the Judæans the favour of being received as allies of Rome, they were to present as a mark of homage.

The Roman Senate was not indisposed to enroll the most insignificant nation among their allies, being well aware that in granting the favour of their protection they had taken the first step towards reducing it to vassalage. Rome resembles an unfaithful guardian, who takes infinite care of the property of his ward, only to gather riches for himself. The Roman Senate made known to their friends and vassals that they had accepted Judæa as their ally, and the Syrian rulers were forbidden to attack it (140). Scarcely two hundred years later, a shameless, bloodthirsty Roman Emperor will insist upon being worshipped in the Temple at Jerusalem, and after another thirty years will have passed, Rome will break the strength of the Judæan nation, kill its heroes, and hunt its sons like wild beasts. But these dire results of the Roman alliance were unsuspected by Simon or his contemporaries, who rejoiced at being called friends, brothers and allies of the great Roman nation. In order to show their gratitude to their leader for the boon he had procured for them, the Jewish people conferred upon him, with great solemnity, supreme and permanent sovereignty over themselves.

One can hardly find, in all antiquity, a similar example of absolute power thus bestowed upon a prince, and of a quiet, peaceful transformation of a republic into a monarchy like that carried into effect by the people of Judæa at that time. The deed which endorsed this gift of the monarchy to Simon is preserved in a record, which places strikingly before us the gratitude felt towards the Hasmonæans by the newly-constituted nation.

On the 28th Elul (September) of the year 140, the third year of Simon's tenure of the high-priesthood, the priests, the elders and representatives of the nation, and all the people of Jerusalem were assembled, probably upon the Temple Mount, and there agreed, in recognition of the great services rendered by Simon and the Hasmonæans to the people and the Sanctuary, to consider him and his descendants as their leader (Nassi) and High-Priest, "until such time as a prophet should arise." As the outward sign of his dignity, Simon was to wear a purple mantle with a golden clasp. All public acts were to be in his name; peace and war were to be decided upon by him; he was to have sole power to appoint the commanders of the army and the fortresses, as well as the managers of the Temple and all its sacred trusts. Whoever opposed him was liable to punishment.

This decree of the people, a copy of which was deposited in the Temple archives, was engraven on brass tablets, which were placed in a conspicuous position in the Temple court; and besides, memorial columns in its honor were erected on Mount Zion. In spite of their antipathy to the customs of the neighbouring Greeks, the Judæans had learned from them the art of immortalising their deeds in stone and metal. Unlike the Greeks, however, they were not capricious in the honours and favours they granted. Those to whom monuments were erected one day were not bespattered with mud the next, but, on the contrary, lived forever in the grateful hearts of their countrymen. Israel had now again a prince lawfully chosen by the people, having been deprived of a ruler for the space of nine jubilees, ever since the captivity of Zedekiah. If the nation did not give Simon the title of king, but only that of prince, it was not done in order to lessen his power in any way, but that they might remain faithful to the house of David. According to the views held at that time in Judæa, it was only a descendant of David who could be king, he being also the expected Messiah. The deed which gave the sovereign power to Simon contained the proviso that he should, therefore, retain it until the appearance of the true prophet Elijah, who was expected to be the precursor of the Messiah.

It was not until Simon had been formally recognised as ruler, that he made use of the right to coin money granted him by Antiochus Sidetes. This was the first time that Judæan coins were struck. On one side was stamped the value of the coin with the inscription "Shekel of Israel"; on the other, the words "Jerusalem the Holy" (Jerushalaim Hakke-dosha), the date being indicated by an abbreviation. Emblems of the high-priesthood of Israel were used as devices for the coins; upon one side was engraven a blossoming branch (Aaron's staff); upon the other a sort of cup, probably representing a vessel for incense. But Simon's name or dignity, his title of prince or high-priest, did not appear on them. The letters used in the inscriptions were old Hebrew or Samaritan, probably because these characters were familiar to the nations around, whilst they would have been unable to decipher the new ones. The earliest date we find on the coins of Simon is that of the fourth year of his reign, from which we may infer that it was not till some years after he had assumed the regal powers (about 139) that he commenced coining money.

Friendly as Antiochus Sidetes had shown himself towards Simon whilst he had but little hope of defeating the usurper Tryphon, his demeanour completely changed as soon as, by the help of the Judæans, he had nearly attained his aim, and he became as cold as he had previously been gracious and well disposed. To avoid the appearance of ingratitude in his subsequent conduct, Antiochus sent back the two thousand troops, as well as the money with which Simon had supplied him for the siege of the town of Dora (139). The Syrian king despatched his general Cendebæus to Simon to reproach him for having overstepped the limits of independence granted to him, and with having taken the Syrian possessions, Joppa, Gazara and the Acra in Jerusalem, without offering any compensation. He therefore called upon Simon to restore those places or to pay a thousand talents of silver. Simon replied that he had only recovered the former inheritance of his fathers, but was ready to give a hundred talents for Joppa and Gazara. The dispute, however, could not be settled by friendly means, but was left to the arbitrament of the sword.

Whilst Antiochus himself pursued Tryphon, who had escaped from the fortress of Dora, he sent troops of infantry and cavalry under the general Cendebæus, the Hyrcanian, to invade Judæa, and bring the whole country again under the Syrian rule. Simon prepared for a hard struggle. Fortunately he could assemble a considerable army, 20,000 men, and he was able to raise troops of cavalry, the want of which on former occasions had been so disastrous to Judæa. Simon, being too old to take an active part in the war, named as his generals his two sons, Johanan (John) and Judah, who marched out of Gazara against the enemy. In the meantime Cendebæus had penetrated into the country as far as Ekron, plundering the inhabitants and carrying away captive those who dwelt in the lowlands. On a plain situated between Ekron (which Cendebæus fortified) and Modin, a battle was fought and gained by the Judæans. Cendebæus and his army were defeated and pursued to Azotus, which town, having offered resistance, was destroyed by fire. Johanan, to whom the success of the campaign was chiefly due, received in commemoration of his victory over the Hyrcanian, the name Hyrcanus. This was the last war which took place in Simon's time (137–136), and it inspired him with confidence in the capacity of his sons to uphold the aspiring power of Judæa. Antiochus was still more embittered against Simon by the defeat his arms had suffered, but, too weak to attempt a new attack, he now had recourse to stratagem, and hoped by a cunning plot to sweep from his path the whole family of the Hasmonæans, the obstinate and successful foes of his house. To accomplish this aim he strove to awaken the ambition and avarice of one who, being Simon's son-in-law, might easily find opportunities for committing the wished-for crime. This shameless man, Ptolemy ben Habub, was not held in check either by gratitude or the ties of family affection, nor did feelings of reverence for one grown old in deeds of heroism or the love of his country restrain him. With his daughter's hand Simon had given him riches, and had made him governor of Jericho and the surrounding district, but the ambitious spirit of his son-in-law remained unsatisfied, and he was eager to seize upon the inheritance of Judæa, and with the help of the foreigner to rule in the kingdom. It was easy for Ptolemy to carry out the villainous design he had conceived, for the most vigilant and far-seeing mind could hardly have suspected so base an act. In spite of Simon's great age it was his custom to visit all parts of the country, in order to make himself acquainted with the wants of the people and the manner in which the laws were administered. During one of these journeys he came to the fortress of Dok, near Jericho, where his son-in-law resided. He was accompanied by his wife and his two younger sons, Judah and Mattathias, but the elder one, John, had remained at his post at Gazara.

Ptolemy proffered friendly hospitality to the victims he meant to sacrifice; he prepared a splendid banquet for them, and whilst they were enjoying themselves at the feast, Ptolemy and his satellites fell upon and massacred Simon and his sons (Shebat, February, 135).

As soon as the crime had been committed, the murderer sent messengers to the Syrian king, asking for troops to assist him in his ambitious designs. He also despatched soldiers to Gazara to assassinate John, and to Jerusalem to take possession of the city and the Temple. But Ptolemy was not to reap the expected reward of his treachery. A friend, who had managed to escape from the fortress of Dok, hurried to Gazara, and warned John of the impending danger, and as soon as the assassins reached the city they received the due punishment of their crime. John was likewise successful in reaching Jerusalem before Ptolemy, and had little difficulty in persuading the people to stand by him. The expected help from Antiochus also failed, doubtless because that king was engaged in warlike operations elsewhere, so that Ptolemy was obliged to shut himself up in his own fortress. Here he kept his mother-in-law imprisoned as a hostage, and prepared to defend himself against the attacks which would probably be made upon him.

Thus perished Simon, the last of the Hasmonæan brothers, not one of whom had died a natural death, one and all having lost their lives in the service of their country and their faith. Judah and Eleazar were killed upon the field of battle, whilst John, Jonathan, and Simon, less fortunate than their brothers, succumbed to the cruel treachery of the enemies of their people.

END OF VOL. I.

FOOTNOTES

1 In Hebrew the word Abir means bull, mighty, and hence God. It is connected with the Egyptian abr (a bull), from which Apis is derived. Conf. Jeremiah xlvi. 15.

2 Levit. xvii. 7. The sending of the scape-goat to Azazel marked the abomination in which this lascivious cult was held.

3 Conf. Ezekiel xxiii. 7, 8.

4 Micah vi. 4, mentions also Miriam, with her brothers, as a deliverer.

5 The situation of Sinai is not to be sought in the so-called Sinaitic peninsula, but near the land of Edom, on the confines of which was the desert of Paran. Neither Jebel Musa, with the adjacent peaks of Jebel Catherine and Ras-es-Sufsafeh, nor Mount Jerbal, was the true Sinai. See "Monatsschrift," by Fränkel-Graetz, 1878, p. 337.

6 Joshua x. 12, 13.

7 Deut. viii. 7–9.

8 Deut. xxxiii. 13, 14.

9 Amos iv. 13.

10 Judges vi. 13.

11 Judges iii. 8 and 10 must be read "king of Edom" (אדום) instead of Aram (ארם).

12 Judges xi. 7.

13 Genesis xlix. 16, 17.

14 See Psalm lxxviii. 60–64; Jeremiah vii. 12.

15 Jeremiah xv. 1; Psalms xcix. 6.

16 I Samuel xiv. 12.

17 I Samuel xiv. 45.

18 I Samuel xv. 12 to 33. In the 32d verse read mar mar hammaveth.

19 I Samuel xv. 28.

20 Amos vi. 4–6.