Читать книгу The History of the Jews (All Six Volumes) - Graetz Heinrich - Страница 24

Table of Contents

Enmity of the Samaritans against the Judæans​—​The Temple on Mount Gerizim​—​The High-Priest Manasseh​—​The mixed language of the Samaritans​—​Their veneration for the Law of Moses​—​Judaism loses its national meaning​—​The Jubilee and Sabbatical Year​—​Almsgiving​—​The Council of Seventy​—​The Assyrian Characters​—​The Schools and the Sopherim​—​Observance of the Ceremonies​—​The Prayers​—​The Future Life​—​The Judæans under Artaxerxes II. and III.​—​Their Banishment to the Caspian Sea​—​Johanan and Joshua contend for the office of High-Priest​—​Bagoas​—​The Writings of the Period​—​The Greeks and Macedonians​—​Alexander the Great and the Judæans​—​Judæa accounted a Province of Cœlesyria​—​Struggles between Alexander's Successors​—​Capture of Jerusalem by Ptolemy​—​Judæa added to the Lagidean-Egyptian Kingdom​—​The Judæan Colonies in Egypt and Syria and the Greek Colonies in Palestine.

420–300 B. C. E.

Hatred which arises from rejected love is stronger and more vehement than enmity resulting from inexplicable antipathy, jealousy, or disagreement. Sanballat, as well as his Samaritan followers and companions, out of preference for the God of Israel, had struggled to be received into the Judæan community. The virulence of their enmity against Nehemiah, who had raised the commonwealth from its declining state, was in reality an impetuous offer of love, by which they hoped to secure an intimate connection with Judæa. But as they were repulsed again and again, this yearning love changed into burning hatred. When Sanballat, who thought he had attained his aim by his connection with the high-priest's family, learned of the insult shown him in the banishment of his son-in-law Manasseh, because of that priest's marriage with his daughter, the measure of his wrath was full. He cunningly conceived the plan of disorganising the Judæan community, by the help of its own members. What if he were to raise a temple to the God of Israel, to contest the supremacy of the one at Jerusalem? There were among his followers priests of the descendants of Aaron, who could legally conduct the service, as prescribed in the Torah, in the projected sanctuary. The dignity of high-priest could fitly be assumed by his son-in-law Manasseh, and the other Aaronides who had been expelled from the Temple could officiate with him. Everything appeared favourable to his design. Both his desire of worshipping the God of Israel, and his ambition to be at the head of a separate community, could easily be satisfied at the same time.

On the summit of the fruitful Mount Gerizim, at the foot of the city of Shechem, in the very heart of the land of Palestine, Sanballat built his Temple, probably after the death of Artaxerxes (about 420).

The Aaronides who had been expelled from Jerusalem, and who were well versed in all the tenets of the Law, had selected this site because they knew that, according to the Book of Deuteronomy, the blessings were to be pronounced upon the followers of the Law of Moses from that mount. But the Samaritans gave to the old words a new interpretation. They called, and still call to this day, Mount Gerizim "the Mount of Blessings," as if blessing and salvation proceeded from the mount itself. Even the town of Shechem they called "Blessing" (Mabrachta). Sanballat, or the priests of this temple of Gerizim, declared that the mixed race of the Samaritans were not descendants of the exiles placed in that country by an Assyrian king, but that, on the contrary, they were true Israelites, a remnant of the Ten Tribes, or of the tribes of Joseph and Ephraim. There may indeed have been amongst them some descendants of the families who, after the destruction of the kingdom of the Ten Tribes, clung to Samaria; but that the numerous Cuthæans who gathered round Sanballat, together with the Ammonites and the Arabians, were descendants of Joseph and Ephraim and Israelites, was one of those ingenious and audacious fictions which, by their very exaggeration, stagger even those who are thoroughly convinced of their falsehood. Their language, however, betrayed their mixed origin; it was a conglomeration of Aramaic and other foreign elements, so that it is to this day impossible to define its origin satisfactorily.

But the venture was a successful one. The Samaritans had their temple, around which they gathered; they had priests from the house of Aaron; they impudently opposed their Hargerizim, as they called their holy mount, to Mount Moriah; they interpreted the Book of the Law to suit themselves, making it appear that God had designed Mount Gerizim as a site for a sanctuary, and they proudly called themselves Israelites. Sanballat and his followers, intent upon attracting a great many Judæans to their community, tempted them with the offer of houses and land, and in every way helped to support them. Those who had been guilty of crime in Judæa or Jerusalem, and feared punishment were received with open arms by the Samaritans. Out of such elements a new semi-Judæan community or sect was formed. Their home was in the somewhat limited district of Samaria, the centre of which was either the city that gave its name to the province, or the town of Shechem. The members of the new community became an active, vigorous, intelligent people, as if Sanballat, the founder, had infused his spirit into them. In spite of its diminutive size, this sect has continued until the present day. The existence of the Samaritans, as a community, may really be considered a signal victory of the Judæan faith, for it was their religion alone that kept so mixed a people together; it became the loadstar of their lives, and to it they remained faithful, in spite of adversity and disaster. The Samaritans treated the Torah, brought to them by exiled priests, with as much reverence as the Judæans did, and regulated their religious and social life according to its requirements. But, in spite of this community of essential principles, the Judæans were not delighted with this accession to the ranks of their faith. This first Judæan sect caused them as much sorrow as those which, at a later period, grew up among them. The Samaritans were not only their most bitter foes, but actually denied to them the right of existence as a community. They declared that they alone were the descendants of Israel, disputing the sanctity of Jerusalem and its Temple, and affirming that everything established by the Judæan people was a mere counterfeit of the old Israelitish customs. The Samaritans were ever on the alert to introduce into their own country such improvements as were carried into effect in Judæa, though, had it been in their power, they would have destroyed the nation which was their model. On the part of the Judæans, the hatred against their Samaritan neighbours was equally great. They spoke of them as "the foolish people who lived in Shechem." The enmity between Jerusalem and Samaria that existed in the time of the two kingdoms blazed up anew; it no longer bore a political, but a religious character, and was therefore the more violent and intense.

The existence of the Samaritan sect had, however, a stimulating effect upon the Judæans: as the latter continually came into collision with their opponents, and were obliged to listen to doctrines in the highest degree distasteful to them, they were forced to a careful study of the essence of their own belief. The Samaritans helped them to acquire self-knowledge. What was it that distinguished them, not only from the heathen world, but also from those neighbours who worshipped the one God, and acknowledged as authoritative the same Revelation? It was the thought that they possessed a peculiar creed, and the conception of "Judaism" gained clearness in their minds. Judaism no longer meant a nationality, but a religious conviction. The name "Judæan" lost its racial meaning, and was applied to any adherent of the Jewish faith, be he a descendant of Judah or Benjamin, an Aaronide or a Levite. The two fundamental principles of this faith were the acknowledgment of the one God, and of the Torah, in which God reveals himself through the mediation of Moses.

The reverence and love with which the Sacred Book came to be regarded after the days of Ezra and Nehemiah were as deep as had been the general indifference to it in earlier times. "A wise man trusts the Law, and the Law is as true to him as the words of the truth-giving Urim and Thummim." The Torah was looked upon as the quintessence of all wisdom, and was honoured as such. Hebrew poetry, still full of life, glorified it with enthusiastic praise. It followed naturally that the Torah became the fundamental law of the little state or commonwealth of Judah. Before a Judæan undertook or desisted from any action, he would ask whether his course was in conformity with the Law. Slavery ceased to exist; even if a Judæan wished to sell himself as a slave he could not find a buyer. Therefore the year of Jubilee, intended as a year of release of slaves, became a superfluous institution. On the other hand, the Sabbatical year was strictly kept. The debts of the poor were then cancelled, and the fields lay fallow. Probably the Judæan favourites at the Persian court had already demanded that, in the Sabbatical year, the taxes upon the produce of the fields be remitted. The poor were looked after with great solicitude, for the Pentateuch demanded that there should be no needy in the land. Alms giving was looked upon in this new order of things as the exercise of the highest virtue. In every town, members of the Judæan community were appointed to devote themselves to the care of the poor. The constant denunciations by the prophets and psalmists of the hard-heartedness displayed towards the poor and the helpless were no longer justified. Justice was admirably administered, and so conscientiously was the law executed that the Judæan law-officers might have been held up as models to the rest of the world. Twice a week, on Mondays and Thursdays, the market days, public courts of justice were held in all large towns.

It was most natural that, as the life of the community was regulated according to the commands of the Torah, the spiritual leaders of the people should devise a supreme court of justice, possessing the power to make and interpret laws. They were but carrying out the words of Deuteronomy, in which was enjoined the establishment of a superior court of justice, where a final decision in doubtful cases could be given. The question now arose as to the number of members to constitute this court. Seventy elders had shared with Moses the great burden of his duties, the representatives of the seventy chief families of the children of Israel. It was therefore decided that the supreme tribunal and high court of justice should number seventy elders. This peculiar institution, which lasted until the destruction of the Judæan commonwealth, which became the strict guardian of the Law, and at times rose to great political importance, was doubtless called into life at this period. At no other time could it have arisen. Thus the great assembly which Nehemiah had originally summoned, merely for the purpose of accepting the obligations of the Torah, developed into a permanent council for settling all religious and social questions. The seventy members of the supreme council were probably chosen from various great families. The high-priest, whether he was worthy of the dignity or not, was placed at their head. The president was called "father of the tribunal" (Ab Beth-din). As soon as the council was formed, it proceeded to carry into effect what Ezra and Nehemiah had begun, namely, the application of Judaism or the Law to the life and customs of the people. This supreme council brought about a complete revolution.

All the changes which we notice two hundred years later in the Judæan commonwealth were its work; the new regulations which tradition assigns to Ezra, and which were known under the name of Sopheric regulations (Dibre Sopherim) were the creations of this body. It laid a sure foundation for the edifice that was to last thousands of years. During this period it was that regular readings from the Law were instituted; on every Sabbath and on every Holy Day a portion from the Pentateuch was to be read to the assembled congregation. Twice a week, when the country people came from the villages to market in the neighbouring towns, or to appeal at the courts of justice, some verses of the Pentateuch, however few, were to be read publicly. At first only the learned did the public reading, but gradually as it came to be looked upon as a great honour to belong to the learned class, every one was anxious to be called upon to do duty as a reader. But the characters in which the Torah was written were an obstacle in the way of overcoming illiteracy. The text of the Torah was written in an antique script with Phœnician or old Babylonian characters, which could be deciphered only by practised scribes. For the Judæans in Persia, even more than for the Judæans in Palestine, the Torah was a book with seven seals. It was therefore necessary to transform the old-fashioned characters of the Hebrew Scriptures (Khetab Ibrith) into others, which were familiar to the inhabitants of the land between the Euphrates and the Tigris, and which the Judæans of Palestine and of the Persian provinces used also for the ordinary purposes of every-day life. In order to distinguish it from the old writing, the new style was called the Assyrian (Khetab Ashurith), because it had arisen in one of the Assyrian provinces. The Samaritans, animated by a spirit of contradiction, retained the old Hebrew characters for their Pentateuch, only in order to be able to reproach their opponents with having introduced a forbidden innovation and falsified the Torah. Until the present day, their holy writ exists in these old-fashioned characters, and it is a closed book even to most of their priests.

Owing to the regular reading of the Law and to its accessibility, there arose among the Judæans an intellectual activity which gradually gave a peculiar character to the whole nation. The Torah became their spiritual and intellectual property, and their own inner sanctuary. At this time there sprang up another important institution, namely, schools for young men, where the text of the Law was taught, and love for its teachings and principles cultivated. The intellectual leaders of the people continually enjoined on the rising generation, "Bring up a great many disciples." And what they enjoined so strenuously on others they themselves must have zealously laboured to perform. One of these religious schools (Beth-Waad) was established in Jerusalem. The teachers were called scribes (Sopherim) or wise men; the disciples, pupils of the wise (Talmide Chachamim). The wise men or scribes had a twofold activity: on the one hand, to explain the Torah, and on the other, to make the laws applicable both to individual and communal life. This supplementary interpretation was called "exposition" (Midrash); it was not arbitrary, but rested upon certain rules laid down for the proper interpretation of the Law. The supreme council and the houses of learning worked together, and one completed the other.

The result was a most important mental development, which impressed upon the descendants of the patriarchs a new characteristic so strongly as to make it seem second nature in them: the impulse to investigate, to interpret, and to tax their ingenuity in order to discover some new and hidden meaning either in the word or the substance. The supreme council, the source of these institutions and this new movement, did not confine itself to the interpretation of the existing laws, and to their application to daily life, but it also drew up its own code of laws, which were to regulate, to stimulate and to strengthen the religious and social life of the people. There was an old maxim of great repute in Judæa: "Make a fence about the Law." By this maxim the teacher of the Law was directed to forbid certain things in themselves permissible, which, however, touched too closely upon the forbidden points, or might be confounded with them. This method of guarding against any possible infringement of the Law, by means of a "fence" (Seyag), had its justification in the careless, unsettled habits of those early days. It was absolutely necessary that the mass of the people, who were wholly uneducated, should accustom themselves to the performance of the precepts and duties enjoined by the Law.

An entire set of laws, made for the purpose of preventing the violation of the commands of the Torah, belong to the Sopheric age. For instance, the degrees of relationship considered unlawful for matrimony were increased in number; to prevent the violation of chastity, men were forbidden to hold private interviews with married women in solitary places. The loose way in which the Sabbath was observed in Nehemiah's age was replaced by an extraordinarily rigid observance of the Sabbath. In order to prevent any possible violation of the Sabbath or of the festival days, all work was to cease before sunset on the preceding evening, and an official was appointed to proclaim, by the blast of a horn, the proper hour for repose. But the Sabbath day and the festivals were intended to create a feeling of both devotion and exaltation in the observers of the Law, and to banish from their memory the cares and the troubles of the working days. It was partly to express this that it became a custom in those days to drink a goblet of wine at the coming in and at the going out of the festivals, and to pronounce a blessing upon them, at their commencement declaring that these days are holy, and sanctified by God (Kiddush), and at their close, that they have a peculiar significance in contradistinction to the working days (Habdalah). By laws such as these, which were not permitted to remain a dead letter, the Sabbath acquired a holy character.

The first evening of the Paschal feast, falling in the spring time, was also invested with peculiar importance. It was intended to arouse every year and to keep alive a grateful remembrance of the deliverance from Egypt, and the consciousness of being in possession of precious freedom. It became either a law or a custom to drink four glasses of wine upon this festival of rejoicing, and even the poorest managed to obtain the draught "that rejoices the heart." On the eve of the Passover, the members of each family, with their most intimate friends, gathered round the table, not to indulge in a luxurious meal, but to thank and praise the God of their fathers; they ate bitter herbs, broke unleavened bread, tasted some of the paschal lamb in commemoration of their freedom, and drank the four goblets of wine to celebrate this bright festival with a cheerful heart. Gradually the custom arose for several families to celebrate the Paschal eve in common, the whole assembly (Chaburah) to partake of the lamb, amid the singing of psalms. The Paschal eve became in time a delightful family festival.

The prayers prescribed on Sopheric authority had no hard and fast form, but the line of thought which they were to contain was, in general, laid down. The form of prayer used in the Temple became the model of the services in all prayer-houses, or houses of gathering (Beth-ha-Keneseth). Divine service was performed at early morning in a court of the Temple, and commenced with one or more specially selected psalms of praise and thanksgiving. At the conclusion of the psalms, the whole congregation exclaimed: "Praise be to the God of Israel, who alone doeth wonders, and praised be the glory of His name for ever and ever, and may His glory fill the whole earth"; upon which followed a prayer of thanksgiving for the light of the sun, which God had given to the whole world, and for the light of the Law, which He had given to Israel. This was succeeded by the reading of several portions from the Torah, the Ten Commandments and the Schema: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one," to which the whole congregation responded: "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom for ever and ever." The principal prayer, the Tephillah, was composed of six short parts: a thanksgiving that God had chosen the children of Israel as His servants; an acknowledgment of the Divine Power, as shown in nature, by the life-giving rain, and as manifested in man, by the future resurrection of the dead; an acknowledgment of the holiness of God; a supplication for the accomplishment of all prayers and for the acceptance of sacrifice; a thanksgiving for the preservation of life, and finally a prayer for peace, following the blessing of the priest. In the afternoon and evening, the congregation assembled again for prayer, but the service was short, as the Psalms and chapters of the Law were omitted.

On the Sabbath and festive days, the morning service was not materially different, except that a particular prayer was interpolated, in which special mention was made of the sanctity of the day, and a longer portion from the Torah was read at its close. In time a portion from the prophets, especially a chapter bearing upon the character of the day, was read. The opposition in which the Judæans stood to the Samaritans prompted this reading from the prophets. For the Samaritans who denied the sanctity of the Temple and of Jerusalem, rejected the prophetical writings, because they contained constant allusions to the holy city and the chosen sanctuary. So much the more necessary did it appear to the upholders of Judaism to publish these writings. In consequence of this regulation, the words of the prophets who had but rarely been listened to while they lived, were now read in every Judæan house of prayer, and though they were but partially understood by the greater number of the congregation, nevertheless they became mighty levers to arouse the enthusiasm of the nation. As these readings ended the morning service, they were called "the conclusion" (Haphtarah). It thus became necessary to make an authoritative collection of the prophetic writings, and to decide which of the books were to be excluded, and which adopted. This choice was probably made by the legislative body of the Sopheric age. The collection embraced the four historical books, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, which were called the Earlier Prophets; then came three books, great in interest, bearing the names of the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and lastly the twelve minor prophets, Hosea, Amos, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zachariah, and Malachi, these twelve, in conjunction with the three greater, being styled the Later Prophets. These works were all recognised as Holy Writ, but were placed next to the Torah, as of secondary degree of holiness.

In this way the divine service of the Sopheric age was constructed; it was simple and edifying; it contained nothing superfluous, disturbing or wearying, and it embodied the thought and spirit of those time-honoured treasures, the writings of the prophets and the psalmists. It contained only one foreign element, the belief in the resurrection of the dead on the last day. With this exception, everything was taken from the pure spring of the earliest teachings.

The inhabitants of the country towns introduced in their own congregations an exact copy of the divine service as it was conducted in Jerusalem. They needed no urging to this by mandatory enactments. Thus in each town, houses of prayer (Synagogues, Moăde-El) were established, in which was introduced the order of prayer which is the groundwork of the divine service of the present day. Besides the prayers, sacrifices were offered up according to the letter of the Law. These two forms of divine service were blended into one; they completed and helped one another. The spiritual service adapted itself to the sacrificial ceremonies; three times during the day, whilst the priests were offering up their sacrifices, the congregations assembled in the prayer-houses, whereas on the Sabbath and on festivals, when special sacrifices were offered up in the Temple (Korban Mussaph), the congregation assembled four times for prayer (Tephillath Mussaph). But even the sacrificial service could not shut out the living word; it had to grow, as it were, more spiritual, and it became customary to sing the Psalms at intervals between the offerings, because of the great influence which this sublime poetry possessed.

There was, however, one very prominent feature connected with the Temple and the sacrifices, which was opposed to the essentially spiritual tendency of the prophetic and psalmistic poetry. It was that which related to the laws concerning purity and impurity. The law of the Torah had certainly given very precise regulations on these matters; an unclean person could not bring offerings, or approach the sanctuary, or even taste consecrated food. There were many degrees of uncleanness, and the Law prescribed how unclean persons might be purified. The last act of purification always consisted in bathing in fresh running water. These laws would never have attained such far-reaching importance, involving every station in life, had it not been for the sojourn of the Judæans, during so many centuries, among the Persians, whose much more stringent purification laws were rigorously observed. The statutes concerning uncleanness, according to the Iranian Avesta of the Persians, whose priests were the Magi, were extremely strict, and the means adopted for purification revolting. Dwelling among the Magi, the Judæans absorbed much from them. The striking resemblance of many of their laws and customs to their own could not escape their observation, and they yielded to Magian influences.

The fundamental conception of the Deity, as of one incorporeal perfect God, was so firmly implanted in the heart of every Judæan, that no one would allow himself to be influenced by the conception of the Persian god of light, Ahura-Mazda (Ormuzd), however spiritual that conception might be. Their seers, full of penetration, speedily divined the error of the Iranian doctrine of acknowledging two great rival powers, the god of light and goodness, and the god of darkness and sin, Angro-Mainyus (Ahriman). They contrasted that doctrine with their own belief, that the God of Israel created light and darkness, good and evil. They denied that the world and mankind are being perpetually drawn in divergent directions by two rival powers, but are destined to live in peace and unity. The spiritual leaders of the Judæans in the Sopheric age expressed this belief in one of the morning prayers: "God is the Creator of light and of darkness, He has created peace and has made everything." But although the Judæans resisted any alteration in their conception of the Deity, still they could not prevent many of the ideas and customs of the Persians from gaining ground among the nation. They imagined that they were adding to the glory of God if, in imitation of the Iranians, they surrounded Him with myriads of obedient servants. The "messengers of God," whom we read of in the Bible as executors of His will, became, after the pattern of Persian beliefs, heavenly creatures, endowed with peculiar characteristics and special individuality. The people pictured to themselves the divine throne, surrounded by a countless throng of heavenly beings, or angels, awaiting a sign to do the bidding of God. "Thousand times thousands served Him, and myriad times myriads stood before Him." Like the Persians, the Judæans called the angels "the holy watchers" (Irin-Kadishin). The angels received special names: Michael, Gabriel, the strong, Raphael, the healer, Uriel or Suriel, Matatoron, and others.

As fancy had changed the Yazatas into angels, and given them a Hebrew character and Hebrew names, so also were the bad spirits, or Daevas, introduced among the Judæans. Satan was a copy of Angro-Mainyus, but he was not placed in juxtaposition to the God of Israel, for this would have been a denial of the fundamental doctrine of the Judæans. He, the Holy One, high and mighty and all-powerful, could not be limited, or in any way interfered with by one of His own creatures. Still the first step had been taken, and, in the course of time, Satan grew to be as strong and powerful as his Iranian prototype, and was endowed with a kingdom of darkness of his own, where he reigned as the supreme power of evil. Once created in the image of Angro-Mainyus, Satan had to be surrounded with a host of attendant demons or evil spirits (Shedim, Mazikim, Malache Chabalah). One demon, as an adaptation of the Iranian Daeva names, was called Ashmodai; another, by the name of Samael, was at the head of a troop of persecuting spirits. The angel of death (Malach-ham Maveth), lying in ambush, ready to seize upon men's lives, was endowed with a thousand eyes. These creatures of the imagination soon took firm hold of the Jewish soul, and with them many usages resembling those of the Magi invaded the Jewish religion; and especially the laws of purification became more and more rigorous.

It was also at that time that a new doctrine of retribution was developed in Judaism. According to the Iranian doctrine, the universe was divided into two great kingdoms; that of light and that of darkness; the pure, or worshippers of Ahura-Mazda, were admitted into the region of light (Paradise), and the wicked, the followers of Angro-Mainyus, into the kingdom of darkness (Hell). After death, the soul remained during three days near the body it had tenanted; then, according to its life upon earth, it was taken by the Yazatas to Paradise, or was drawn down by the Daevas into Hell. This idea of retribution after death was adopted by the Judæans. The Garden of Eden (Gan-Eden), where the story of the Creation placed the first human beings whilst they lived in a state of innocence, was transformed into Paradise, and the Valley of Hinnom (Ge-Hinnom), in which, since the days of Ahaz, sacrifices of children had been offered up, gave the name to the newly-created Hell. In what way could such new beliefs have crept into the Judæan faith? That is as little capable of demonstration as is the way in which the pores of the skin become impregnated with a disease that has poisoned the atmosphere. However, these views about angels and Satan with his attendant spirits, about Paradise and Hell, never obtained the dignity of fixed dogmas which it would be mortal sin to doubt, but on the contrary, during that time, and in all future time, their adoption or repudiation was left to the discretion of the individual. Only one belief emanating from the Iranian religion, that of the resurrection of the dead, became part of the spiritual life of the Judæans, until it grew at last to be a binding dogma. The Magi had taught and insisted upon this doctrine. They believed that the re-awakening of the dead would take place at a future day, when Ahura-Mazda will have conquered and destroyed his rival, when the god of darkness will have to give up the bodies of the "pure men" which he has stolen. The Judaism of the Sopheric age adopted this hopeful and inspiriting doctrine all the more readily, as allusions to it existed in the Judaic writings. The prophets had constantly made references to the day of the last judgment, and the scribes, inferring that the resurrection of the dead was meant, made it an article of faith amongst their people, and in the daily prayer, praise was rendered to God for awakening the dead to life.

At a later day, when the Judæan nation was struggling with death, a seer, comforting the sufferers, said:—

"Many of those who are sleeping in dust will awake, some to eternal life, and some to disgrace and everlasting abhorrence." (Daniel xii. 2.)

In this manner a peculiar doctrine of retaliation, with a brilliant picture of the future, or of the next world (Olam ha-Ba), was evolved. A magical world unfolded itself to the eye, intoxicating the believer. He saw the time come when all discords of life would change into harmony, when all disappointments would vanish, when the pious, the faithful, and the just, who had suffered so much upon earth, would rise from their graves and enter on eternal life in innocence and purity. Even the sinners who had erred only from frivolity and weakness would be purified by penitence in Hell, and would enjoy the pleasures of eternal life. But how was this resurrection to take place, and how was this beautiful new world to be organised? Imagination could not find an answer to such a question. Fervent faith and enthusiastic hope do not indulge in subtle inquiries; they are contented with giving the pious the comforting assurance that a just recompense is in store for them, in a future life, and thus assuaging the sorrows of an unhappy earthly existence. Although Judaism received the essence of this teaching from without, yet the power of enriching it, and of endowing it with the faculty of working immeasurable good came from within. The foreign origin of this belief becoming finally obliterated, it was considered as an original Judæan doctrine. Only the Samaritans objected, for a considerable time, to the belief in the resurrection and to the idea of a future life.

During this long period of nearly two hundred years, while the Judæan community established itself, and Judaism developed by the enlargement of its own doctrines and the adoption of foreign elements—from the death of Nehemiah to the destruction of the Persian kingdom—we do not find a single personage mentioned who assisted in that great work, which was to outlive and defy the storms of ages. Was it from excess of modesty that the spiritual leaders of the people, with whom the new order of things had originated, veiled themselves in obscurity, in order to eliminate from their work every vestige of individualism? Or is it the ingratitude of posterity that has effaced these names? Or, again, were the members of the Great Council not sufficiently gifted or remarkable to merit any particular distinction, and was the community indebted for its vigour, and Judaism for its growth and development, entirely to the zeal of a whole community, in which every individual will was completely absorbed? Whatever was the cause, the astonishing fact remains, that of these long stretches of time but few details have become known to us. Either no annals were kept of the events of those years, or they have been lost. It is true there were no very remarkable events to describe, the activity of the Judæan community being entirely restricted to its inward life; there was nothing which might have appeared of sufficient importance to be chronicled for posterity. There was indeed but little for the historian to write about: a stranger might perhaps have been struck by the changes which were gradually unfolding themselves, but to those who lived and worked in the community, what was there of a peculiar or extraordinary nature which might deserve to be perpetuated in history?

The Judæan people occupied themselves almost entirely with peaceful avocations; they understood but little of the use of arms; perhaps not even enough to preserve their own territories against the attacks of their neighbours. The prophet Ezekiel had described what the condition of the Jews would be after their return from captivity:

"In the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is turned away from the sword and is gathered out of many people against the mountains of Israel." (Ezek. xxxviii. 8.)

A peaceful, quiet existence naturally withdraws itself from curious observation. In the wars which were often raging on their borders, the Judæan people certainly took no part. Under Artaxerxes II., surnamed Mnemon (404–362), and under Artaxerxes III., surnamed Ochus (361–338), leaders of the discontented Egyptians, some of whom called themselves kings, endeavoured to free their country from the Persian yoke, and to restore it to its former independence. In order to be enabled to offer effectual resistance to the armies collected for the purpose of putting down these insurrections, the ephemeral kings of Egypt joined the Persian satraps of Phœnicia, to whom Judæa had also been allotted. Persian troops often passed along the Judæan coasts of the Mediterranean towards Egypt, or Egyptians towards Phœnicia, and Greek mercenaries, hired by either power, marched to and fro, and all this warlike array could be constantly observed by the Judæans from their mountain-tops. They did not always remain mere passive spectators; for, though they were not compelled to join the armies, they were certainly not exempt from various charges and tributes. The relations between the Judæans and the Persians was at the same time somewhat disturbed. The latter, influenced by foreign example, began to practise idolatry. The goddess of love, who, under the different names of Beltis, Mylitta, or Aphrodite, was constantly brought under the notice of the Persians, exercised a fascinating power over them. The victories they had achieved and the riches they had acquired, inclined them to sensual pleasures, and they were easily enthralled by the goddess, and induced to serve and worship her. As soon as they had adopted this new deity, they gave her a Persian name, Anahita, Anaitis, and included her in their mythology. Artaxerxes II. sanctioned her worship, and had images of her placed everywhere in his great kingdom, in the three principal cities, Babylon, Susa, and Ecbatana, as well as in Damascus, Sardes, and in all the towns of Persia and Bactria. Through this innovation the Persian religion sustained a double injury. A strange deity was admitted, and image-worship introduced. Thus the spiritual link which had bound the Persians to the followers of Judaism—their common abhorrence of idolatry—was broken. No longer was "pure incense" offered to the incorporeal God of the Judæans. Having compelled his own people to bow down to this newly adopted goddess of love, Artaxerxes tried, as it appears, to force her worship upon the Judæans; the latter were cruelly treated, in order to make them renounce their religion, but they chose the severest punishments, and even death itself, rather than abjure the faith of their fathers. It is related that after his war with the Egyptians and their king Tachos (361–360), Artaxerxes banished many Judæans from their country, and sent them to Hyrkania, on the shores of the Caspian Sea. If this account may be considered historical, the banishment of the Judæans must surely have been a mode of persecution inflicted upon them on account of their fidelity to their laws and their God; for it is hardly to be supposed that they took part in the revolt against Persia, which was then spreading from Egypt to Phœnicia. In Jerusalem there was much suffering at that time, caused by one of those abject creatures, who, owing to the growing degeneracy of the Persian Court and increasing weakness of the kingdom, raised themselves from the dust, and ruled both the countries and the throne. This was the eunuch Bagoas (Bagoses), who under Artaxerxes III. became so powerful that he was able to set aside the king, and fill the throne according to his own pleasure. Before attaining this supreme position, Bagoas had been the commander of the troops stationed in Syria and Phœnicia, and he had taken advantage of the opportunities thus offered him to acquire great riches. He received bribes from Joshua, the ambitious son of the high-priest, who hoped thus to secure that post for himself. Joshua had an elder brother, Johanan, and both were sons of Joiada, one of whose relations, having connected himself with Sanballat, had been banished from Jerusalem by Nehemiah, and subsequently had introduced the rival worship on Mount Gerizim. After the death of Joiada, the younger son, trusting in the countenance of Bagoas, came forward to seize the high-priest's diadem. The elder brother was enraged at this presumption, and a struggle, which ended in bloodshed, took place between the two in the Temple itself. Johanan slew Bagoas's protégé in the Sanctuary. A sad omen for the future! Upon hearing what had occurred at Jerusalem, the eunuch instantly proceeded thither, not to avenge the death of Joshua, but, under the pretext of meting out well-deserved punishment, to extort money for himself. For each lamb that was offered at the daily services in the Temple, the people were ordered to pay 50 drachms as expiatory money, and this sum was to be paid every morning before the sacrifice was performed. Bagoas also violated the law which forbade any layman's entering the Sanctuary, and when the priest, in accordance with the prohibitory decree, tried to prevent his entrance into the Temple, he asked, mockingly, if he was not so pure as the son of the high-priest, who had been murdered there?

The people paid the expiatory money for seven years, when, for some reason, they were freed from their burden. The disfavour into which the Judæan nation had fallen with the last Persian king was turned to account by their malevolent neighbours, the Samaritans, in order to injure them to their utmost power. They appear to have regained by force or cunning the border districts of Ramathaim, Apherema and Lydda, which they had formerly been obliged to quit. The Judæans were now reduced to a struggle for mere existence. Few and brief had been the glimpses of light which had brightened the annals of the Judæan community during the last two hundred years! This light had illumined the first enthusiastic days of the return from captivity during the reign of Darius, who showered favours upon them, and during the time of Nehemiah's presence and zealous activity at Jerusalem. With these exceptions, their lot had been oppression, poverty and pitiable helplessness. They appear to us in their sadness and misery to be ever asking with tearful, uplifted eyes, "Whence shall help come to us?" and traces of this helplessness and misery are visible in the writings that have come down from that period. While the exile lasted, the grief and the longing, which kept the captives in constant and breathless expectation, had brought forth the fairest blossoms of prophecy and poetry; but as soon as the excitement ceased, and hope became a reality, the mental and poetical activity began to sink. The later prophetical utterances, if beauty of form be considered, cannot bear comparison with those of the Captivity. The poetry of the Psalms became weak and full of repetitions, or else borrowed the bloom of older productions. The graceful idyl of the book of Ruth forms an exception in the literature of this period. Historical writings were, from causes easy to explain, completely neglected. Ezra and Nehemiah had given only a short and unpolished account of the occurrences they had witnessed. Quite at the end of this epoch, towards the close of the Persian dominion, it appears that a Levite compiled an historical work (Chronicles), narrating the events from the Creation down to his own time.

But during the life of the author of the annals, or shortly after he had finished his history, a new period dawned, which gave rise to fresh mental exertions among the Judæans, and brought forth proofs of their capacity and worth. This new period was ushered in by the Greeks. They wrought a thorough change in the manners, customs and thoughts of other nations, and materially raised the degree of civilisation among the various peoples then known in the world. However, the diffusion of this civilisation, which was the consequence of the acquisition of political power and widespread conquest, was owing, not to a purely Greek race, but to a mixed people of Greeks and Barbarians, namely, the Macedonians. The grace and charm of the Greeks have caused their faults to be leniently regarded by mankind, but they were not overlooked by the Ruler of the world, and their sins brought retributive punishment upon them. Advantage was easily taken of their mutual jealousies, their many foibles, their restless, unruly disposition, and Greece was apt to fall a prey to any ambitious leader who was an adept in the art of intoxicating flattery, lavish with his gold, and supported by martial force. Such was the case with Philip, king of Macedonia, who dazzled all with his cunning and his wealth, his valour and his army. All Greece lay at his feet. But even now when the king proposed, as a satisfaction to their national pride, that a war should be undertaken against Persia, in which they might at once punish the latter for inroads upon their country, and win fame and booty for themselves, petty feelings of jealousy continued to exist among the people, and to prevent common action. Some of the States could not be influenced, and refused to send delegates to the assembly; whilst other States, or their representatives, had to be bribed to give their consent to the proposed plan. Philip's project of war against Persia was cut short by the hand of an assassin. Then appeared his son, the great Alexander, who was destined to remodel entirely the relations of the various countries, and to draw the peaceful inhabitants of Judæa into the vortex of the great world conflicts. New troubles and new trials were brought upon the Judæan people by the convulsions felt from one end of the known world to the other. A Judæan seer compared Alexander to a leopard endowed with the wings of an eagle. In two battles he gave to the rotten Persian monarchy its deathblow; Asia Minor, Syria, and Phœnicia lay at his feet, and kings and princes, attired in all their pomp, did homage to the conqueror. Tyre and Gaza, the one after a seven months', the other after a two months' siege, were both taken (August and November, 332), and met with a cruel fate.

How did the insignificant dominion of Judæa fare with the invincible hero before whom Egypt, the proud land of the Pharaohs, had fallen humbly prostrate? The historical records of those times have come down to us only in the form of legends, and consequently give us no authentic account of the passing events. It is scarcely credible that the Judæans were prevented from doing homage to Alexander through fear of incurring any guilt by breaking their oath to their Persian rulers. They had never taken such an oath of fealty, but even if they had, after their treatment by the last Persian kings, they would not have felt much remorse in breaking it. There is no doubt that the story of Alexander's approach to Jerusalem, and the favours which he heaped upon the Judæans in consequence of a peculiar vision, rests upon a legend. The High Priest, so it is related, dressed in his holy garments, followed by a troop of priests and Levites, went forth to meet the youthful warrior, and produced so great and extraordinary an effect upon him, that his anger was at once changed into kindness and good will. The explanation given by Alexander to his followers was that the High Priest thus attired had appeared to him in a dream which he had had in Macedonia, and had promised him victory. According to one legend, it was the High Priest Jaddua, according to another, his grandson Simon, who produced this effect upon the Macedonian hero. In reality, the meeting between Alexander and the envoys of the Judæan community no doubt passed simply and naturally enough. The High Priest, perhaps Onias I., Jaddua's son and Simon's father, went forward, like the kings and princes of the land, with a suite of the elders, to do homage and swear allegiance to the conqueror. Alexander was a noble, generous conqueror, who punished cruelly only resistance to his will, but in no way interfered with the peculiar development, the customs, or religious rites of any nation under his sway. He did not force the Grecian faith on any nation, and the favour which he granted to other nations he certainly did not deny to the Judæans. They were only obliged to pay the Macedonian governor the same tax on their lands as the Persian satrap had received.

The first meeting of Greece and Judæa, both of which were, in different ways, to offer civilisation to the world, was of a friendly character, although the one appeared in all her glory and might, the other in her weakness and humility.—Judæa became part of a province, which was bounded on the north by Mount Taurus and Mount Lebanon, and on the south by Egypt, and was called Hollow Syria (Cœlesyria), to distinguish it from the Higher Syria, which lay in the neighbourhood of the Euphrates. The governor of this extensive province, which had formerly been divided into many independent states, resided in Samaria, from which we may infer that it was a fortified and populous town. Samaria, however, was indebted for this preference or dangerous station to its situation in the centre of the province and in a fertile region. Andromachos was the name of the governor whom Alexander placed over the Cœlesyrians. Why were the Samaritans displeased with this apparent distinction? Did they feel themselves hampered in their movements by the presence of the Governor, or was their anger roused by jealousy at the favour shown by Alexander to the Judæans, whom they hated so bitterly? The violent resentment of the Samaritans, or at least of their leaders, went so far that, heedless of the consequences, they rose up against Andromachos, seized him and consigned him to the flames (331). Alexander's wrath, upon hearing of this act of atrocity which had been committed upon one of his generals, was as great as it was just. Had this small, insignificant people dared defy one who had subdued all Egypt, the proud priests of which country had prostrated themselves before him, proclaiming his pre-eminence and his glory? Upon his return from Egypt, while hastening to conquer Persia, he hurried to Samaria to avenge the murder of Andromachos. The authors of the horrible deed were put to death under cruel tortures, another governor called Memnon was placed over Samaria, and the town was filled with Macedonians. In various other ways, Alexander appears to have mortified and humiliated the Samaritans, and knowing that they were enemies of the Judæans, he favoured the latter in order to mark his displeasure towards the former. Several border lands lying between Samaria and Judæa, which had often occasioned strife between the two peoples, he awarded to the Judæans, and likewise freed the latter from the burden of taxation during the Sabbatical year. This favour, of small importance to him who gave it, was a great boon to those who received it, and inflamed the hatred of the Samaritans against the Judæans; every gust of wind seemed to add new fuel to their enmity, which, however, as long as Alexander lived, they were obliged to conceal. His wonderfully rapid and victorious campaigns—as far as the Indus and the Caucasus—seemed to throw a spell over the world, and to paralyse all independent action. When he was not at war, peace reigned supreme, from Greece to India, and from Ethiopia to the shores of the Caspian sea. Alexander was the first conqueror who deemed it a wise policy to allow the peculiar customs of any conquered nation to be maintained; he insisted that respect should be shown to their various religious forms of worship. In Egypt he honoured Apis and Ammon, and in Babylonia the gods of Chaldæa. Thus he determined upon rebuilding the temple of the Babylonian idol Bel, which had been destroyed by Artaxerxes. To accomplish this, he ordered his soldiers to clear away the ruins which had accumulated over the foundations of the building. All obeyed with the exception of the Judæans who, either voluntarily or by compulsion, were serving in his army. They refused their help towards the reconstruction of the idolatrous temple. Naturally enough, their disobedience received severe chastisement from their superior officers, but they bore their punishment bravely, rather than comply with an order which demanded the transgression of one of the principal injunctions of their faith. When Alexander heard of this case of conscience and of the religious fortitude displayed by the Judæan soldiers, he was generous enough to grant them his pardon. But in that incident we may read an omen of the conflicts which were to take place between Judaism and Greekdom.

In the midst of his vast undertaking—that of uniting the whole world into one monarchy—the young hero died (323), leaving no lawful heir to his throne, no successor to his great mind. Confusion arose in all parts of the world, as well as among the armies of Alexander,—dire as if the laws of Nature had been upset, and the sequence of the morrow after to-day were no longer certain. Fearful battles, which resembled the wars of the Titans, ensued. Alexander's warriors, with the experience gained on a thousand battle-fields, would, had they only been united, have been capable of supporting the structure of the Macedonian kingdom; but, although they were not actually Greeks, and even looked down upon the latter, they resembled them in their spirit of insubordination, their want of discipline, and their passion for self-advancement, which greatly surpassed their zeal for the good of the State. Like the Greeks, they coveted power as a means to obtain luxuries and to enable them to indulge in licentious pleasures; in short, they had become adepts in corrupt practices.

The consequence of this state of things was the dissolution of the Macedonian kingdom and its division among the contending leaders. Ptolemy I. Soter, son of Lagos, reigned in Egypt. By means of a successful war he acquired Cœlesyria, together with Judæa. In 320, he demanded the surrender of Jerusalem, but its inhabitants refused to open their gates. On a Sabbath, however, he contrived to surprise the city, and, as the Judæans would not use weapons of defence on that day, he was able to seize the city and to make numerous prisoners, whom he carried away to Egypt. Many Samaritans shared their fate, probably because they had likewise attempted resistance. Both Judæans and Samaritans could have enjoyed happiness—at least, as much happiness as was possible in those hard, cruel times—had they remained subjects of the Lagidian Ptolemy, who was the gentlest of the warring successors of Alexander. He knew how to recognise and appreciate merit, and when his own interests were not at stake, he was just and merciful; but Ptolemy had no acknowledged right upon Cœlesyria. His acquisition of those lands had not been confirmed by the various regents of the Macedonian kingdom who followed each other in rapid succession, and kept up the semblance of a united government. Ptolemy roused the envy of the confederate captains, and in particular that of one of his former allies and fellow-conspirators, Antigonus. This bold soldier was endowed with inventive genius and a fiery nature, and had resolved upon the subjection of all his associates, in order to seize and hold the whole kingdom of Macedonia in his own strong hand. After many years of warlike preparations, a decisive battle at last took place between Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, and Ptolemy, which ended disastrously for the former. The battle of Gaza, fought in the spring of 312, was a memorable one, for from that event Seleucus, who had come as a fugitive to Ptolemy, dated the beginning of his power by introducing the new era called Seleucidæan, or Greek, which also came into use among the Judæans, and was longest retained by them. In consequence of the defeat at Gaza, Demetrius was obliged to withdraw to the north, leaving the whole country to the conqueror. Only a short time elapsed, however, before Antigonus and his son, having joined their forces, compelled Ptolemy to retreat to Egypt. He caused the fortified sea-coast and inland cities, Acco, Joppa, Gaza, and Jerusalem to be demolished, so that they might not become places of defence to his enemies, and Judæa, with the countries that belonged to Cœlesyria, remained in this unguarded condition until, in the battle at Ipsus, in Asia Minor (301), fought against the united armies of Ptolemy, Lysimachus, Cassander, and Seleucus, Antigonus lost at one blow both his glory and his life. The four generals divided the kingdom among themselves. Ptolemy received Egypt and the adjoining lands, and the greater part of Asia fell to Seleucus. Thus Judæa became a portion of the Ptolemæan or Lagidian kingdom, and its fate for a time was linked to that of the latter. The condition of the Judæans, however, underwent no material change. The tribute they had been obliged formerly to pay to the Persian monarch was now demanded by the Egypto-Macedonian court. The freedom and independence of their movements and actions were not more restricted than they had hitherto been; on the contrary, their situation might be considered rather improved than otherwise.

In Judæa, the high-priest, who was answerable for the payment of taxes, was considered as the political chief, and was looked upon as a sacerdotal prince. Ptolemy I. was endowed with a gentle nature, and inclined to benefit his subjects. He had neither desire nor motive to oppress the Judæans. Alexandria, the seaport city founded by Alexander, and considered as the capital of his kingdom by the first Egypto-Macedonian monarch, acquired a large population, and it could only be a source of satisfaction to him to see Judæans from the neighbouring country establishing themselves there. Under Alexander, many Judæans had settled in that city, and, as this far-seeing hero had given equal rights of Macedonian citizenship to all comers, the first Judæan colony in Alexandria enjoyed perfect equality with the other inhabitants, and led a peaceful existence in the new land. A great number of Judæans took up their abode there during the disturbed state of their country, caused by the wars of Antigonus; they also received from Ptolemy protection and the enjoyment of equal laws and rights. And thus arose an Egypto-Judæan community, which was destined to fulfil a peculiar mission. In other places also Judæan colonies were formed. Assured of the good will of the Judæans, Ptolemy distributed them in various Egyptian cities and in Cyrene.

Seleucus, the founder of the Seleucidæan kingdom, the centre of which was situated in Persia, had in addition become possessed of the northern part of Syria, where he founded a new city, Antioch, which became his capital. In order to people this city, as well as other newly-built towns, he was obliged to bring inhabitants into them, and among these partly forced and partly willing settlers were many Judæans, to whom Seleucus gave the full rights of Macedonian citizenship. And, as Judæan colonies arose in the Græco-Macedonian countries, so also Greek colonies were formed upon Judæan ground. Along the Mediterranean coast new seaports were built, or old ones enlarged and embellished, and to these Grecian names were given.