| Hasmoneans חַשְׁמוֹנָאִים; בֵּית חַשְׁמוֹנָאִי | |
|---|---|
| Royal house | |
.jpg) Coin ofAntigonus II Mattathias, the last Hasmonean king of Judea (r. 40–37 BC) | |
| Parent family | Jehoiarib |
| Country | Judea |
| Founded | 167 BC |
| Founder | Mattathias (patriarch) Simon Thassi (first ruler) |
| Final ruler | Antigonus II Mattathias |
| Seat | Jerusalem |
| Historic seat | Modi'in |
| Titles | High Priest Ethnarch/King ofJudea |
| Connected families | Herodian dynasty |
| Deposition | 37 BC |
TheHasmonean dynasty[1] (/hæzməˈniːən/;Hebrew:חַשְׁמוֹנָאִיםḤašmōnāʾīm;Greek:Ασμοναϊκή δυναστεία) was the Jewish rulingdynasty ofJudea during theHellenistic times of theSecond Temple period (part ofclassical antiquity), fromc. 141 BC to 37 BC. Betweenc. 141 andc. 116 BC the dynasty ruled Judea semi-autonomously within theSeleucid Empire, and from roughly 110 BC, with the empire disintegrating, gained further autonomy and expanded into the neighboring regions ofPerea,Samaria,Idumea,Galilee, andIturea. The Hasmonean rulers took the Greek titlebasileus ("king") and the kingdom attained regional power status for several decades. Forces of theRoman Republic intervened in theHasmonean Civil War in 63 BC, turning the kingdom into a client state and marking an irreversible decline of Hasmonean power;Herod the Great displaced the last reigning Hasmonean client-ruler in 37 BC.
Simon Thassi established the dynasty in 141 BC, two decades after his brotherJudah Maccabee (יהודה המכביYehudah HaMakabi) had defeated theSeleucid army during theMaccabean Revolt of 167 to 160 BC. According to1 Maccabees,2 Maccabees, and the first book ofThe Jewish War by historianJosephus (37 – c. 100 AD),[2] the Seleucid kingAntiochus IV Epiphanes (r. 175–164) moved to assert strict control over the Seleucidsatrapy ofCoele Syria andPhoenicia[3] after his successful invasion ofPtolemaic Egypt (170–168 BC) was turned back by the intervention of the Roman Republic.[4][5] He sackedJerusalem and itsTemple, suppressing Jewish and Samaritan religious and cultural observances,[3][6]and imposedHellenistic practices (c. 168–167 BC).[6] The steady collapse of the Seleucid Empire under attacks from the rising powers of the Roman Republic and theParthian Empire allowed Judea to regain some autonomy; however, in 63 BC, the kingdom was invaded by theRoman Republic, broken up and set up as a Romanclient state.
Hyrcanus II andAristobulus II, Simon's great-grandsons, became pawns in aproxy war betweenJulius Caesar andPompey. The deaths of Pompey (48 BC) and Caesar (44 BC), and the relatedRoman civil wars, temporarily relaxed Rome's grip on the Hasmonean kingdom, allowing a brief reassertion of autonomy backed by the Parthian Empire, rapidly crushed by the Romans underMark Antony andAugustus.
The Hasmonean dynasty had survived for 103 years before yielding to theHerodian dynasty in 37 BC. The installation of Herod the Great (anIdumean) as king in 37 BC made Judea a Roman client state and marked the end of the Hasmonean dynasty. Even then, Herod tried to bolster the legitimacy of his reign by marrying a Hasmonean princess,Mariamne, and planning to drown the last male Hasmonean heir at hisJericho palace. In 6 AD, Rome joined Judea proper, Samaria and Idumea into theRoman province of Judaea. In 44 AD, Rome installed the rule of aprocurator side by side with the rule of the Herodian kings (specificallyAgrippa I 41–44 andAgrippa II 50–100).
The family name of the Hasmonean dynasty originates from the ancestor of the house, whom Josephus called by the Hellenised form Asmoneus or Asamoneus (Greek:Ἀσαμωναῖος),[7] said to have been the great-grandfather ofMattathias, but about whom nothing more is known.[8] The name appears to come from the Hebrew nameHashmonai (Hebrew:חַשְׁמוֹנַאי,romanized: Ḥašmōnaʾy).[9] An alternative view posits that the Hebrew nameHashmona'i is linked with the village ofHeshmon, mentioned inJoshua 15:27.[8] P.J. Gott and Logan Licht attribute the name to "Ha Simeon", a veiled reference to theSimeonite Tribe.[10]
The major source of information about the origin of the Hasmonean dynasty is the books1 Maccabees and2 Maccabees, held ascanonical scripture by theCatholic,Orthodox, and mostOriental Orthodox churches and asapocryphal byProtestant denominations, although they do not comprise the canonical books of theHebrew Bible.[11]
The books cover the period from 175 BC to 134 BC during which time the Hasmonean dynasty became semi-independent from theSeleucid empire but had not yet expanded far outside of Judea. They are written from the point of view that the salvation of the Jewish people in a crisis came from God through the family of Mattathias, particularly his sons Judas Maccabeus, Jonathan Apphus, and Simon Thassi, and his grandsonJohn Hyrcanus. The books include historical and religious material from theSeptuagint that was codified byCatholics andEastern Orthodox Christians.
The other primary source for the Hasmonean dynasty is the first book ofThe Wars of the Jews and a more detailed history inAntiquities of the Jews by the Jewish historianJosephus, (37–c. 100 AD).[2] Josephus' account is the only primary source covering the history of the Hasmonean dynasty during the period of its expansion and independence between 110 and 63 BC. Notably, Josephus, aRoman citizen and former general in the Galilee, who survived theJewish–Roman wars of the 1st century, was a Jew who was captured by and cooperated with the Romans, and wrote his books under Roman patronage.
Part ofa series on the | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| History ofIsrael | ||||||||||||||
._Visual_History_of_Nations%2c_Israel_(1948)%2c_New_Canaan%2c_CT.jpg) | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Late Antiquity and Middle Ages
| ||||||||||||||
Modern history | ||||||||||||||
 Israel portal | ||||||||||||||
Part ofa series on the |
|---|
| History ofPalestine |
 |
 Palestine portal |
The lands of the formerKingdom of Israel andKingdom of Judah (c. 722–586 BC), had been occupied in turn byAssyria,Babylonia, theAchaemenid Empire, andAlexander the Great's HellenicMacedonian empire (c. 330 BC), although Jewish religious practice and culture had persisted and even flourished during certain periods. The entire region was heavily contested between the successor states of Alexander's empire, the Seleucid Empire and Ptolemaic Kingdom, during the sixSyrian Wars of the 3rd–1st centuries BC: "After two centuries of peace under the Persians, the Hebrew state found itself once more caught in the middle of power struggles between two great empires: the Seleucid state with itscapital in Syria to the north and the Ptolemaic state, with itscapital in Egypt to the south. ... Between 319 and 302 BC, Jerusalem changed hands seven times."[12]
UnderAntiochus III the Great, the Seleucids wrested control of Judea from the Ptolemies for the final time, defeatingPtolemy V Epiphanes at theBattle of Panium in 200 BC.[13][14] Seleucid rule over the Jewish parts of the region then resulted in the rise of Hellenistic cultural and religious practices: "In addition to the turmoil of war, there arose in the Jewish nation pro-Seleucid and pro-Ptolemaic parties; and the schism exercised great influence upon the Judaism of the time. It was inAntioch that the Jews first made the acquaintance of Hellenism and of the more corrupt sides of Greek culture; and it was from Antioch thatJudea henceforth was ruled."[15]
The continuing Hellenization of Judea pitted those who eagerly Hellenized against traditionalists,[16] as the former felt that the latter's orthodoxy held them back;[17] additionally the conflict between Ptolemies and Seleucids further divided them over allegiance to either faction.
An example of these divisions is the conflict which broke out between High PriestOnias III (who opposed Hellenisation and favoured thePtolemies) and his brotherJason (who favoured Hellenisation and the Seleucids) in 175 BC, followed by a period of political intrigue with both Jason andMenelaus bribing the king to win the High Priesthood, and accusations of murder of competing contenders for the title. The result was a brief civil war. TheTobiads, a philo-Hellenistic party, succeeded in placing Jason into the powerful position of High Priest. He established an arena for public games close by the Temple.[18] Author Lee I. Levine notes, "The 'piece de resistance' of Judaean Hellenisation, and the most dramatic of all these developments, occurred in 175 BC, when the high priest Jason converted Jerusalem into a Greekpolis replete withgymnasium and ephebeion (2 Maccabees 4). Whether this step represents the culmination of a 150-year process of Hellenisation within Jerusalem in general, or whether it was only the initiative of a small coterie of Jerusalem priests with no wider ramifications, has been debated for decades."[19]Hellenised Jews are known to have engaged in non-surgicalforeskin restoration (epispasm) in order to join the dominant Hellenistic cultural practice of socialising naked in the gymnasium,[20][21][22] where theircircumcision would have carried a social stigma;[20][21][22]Classical,Hellenistic, andRoman culture found circumcision to be a cruel, barbaric and repulsive custom.[20][21][22]
In spring 168 BCE, after successfully invading the Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt,Antiochus IV was humiliatingly pressured by the Romans to withdraw. According to the Roman historianLivy, the Roman senate dispatched the diplomatGaius Popilius to Egypt who demanded Antiochus to withdraw. When Antiochus requested time to discuss the matter Popilius "drew a circle round the king with the stick he was carrying and said, 'Before you step out of that circle give me a reply to lay before the senate.'"[23]
While Antiochus was campaigning in Egypt, a rumor spread in Judah that he had been killed. The deposed high priest Jason[clarification needed] took advantage of the situation, attacked Jerusalem, and drove away Menelaus and his followers. Menelaus took refuge inAkra, the Seleucids fortress in Jerusalem. When Antiochus heard of this, he sent an army to Jerusalem who drove out Jason and his followers, and reinstated Menelaus as high priest;[24] he then imposed a tax and established afortress in Jerusalem.
During this period Antiochus tried to suppress public observance of Jewish laws, apparently in an attempt to secure control over the Jews. His government set up anidol ofZeus[25] on theTemple Mount, which Jews considered to be desecration of the Mount, outlawed observance of theSabbath and the offering of sacrifices at the Jerusalem Temple, required Jewish leaders to sacrifice to idols and forbade both circumcision and possession of Jewish scriptures, on pain of death. Punitive executions were also instituted.
According to Josephus,
"Now Antiochus was not satisfied either with his unexpected taking the city, or with its pillage, or with the great slaughter he had made there; but being overcome with his violent passions, and remembering what he had suffered during the siege, he compelled the Jews to dissolve the laws of their country, and to keep their infants uncircumcised, and to sacrifice swine's flesh upon the altar."[26]
The motives of Antiochus are unclear. He may have been incensed at the overthrow of his appointee, Menelaus,[27] he may have been responding to a Jewish revolt that had drawn on the Temple and theTorah for its strength, or he may have been encouraged by a group of radical Hellenisers among the Jews.[28]
The author of theFirst Book of Maccabees regarded the Maccabean revolt as a rising of pious Jews against the Seleucid king who had tried to eradicate their religion and against the Jews who supported him. The author of theSecond Book of Maccabees presented the conflict as a struggle between "Judaism" and "Hellenism", words that he was the first to use.[28] Modern scholarship tends to the second view.
Most modern scholars argue that the king was intervening in acivil war between traditionalist Jews in the countryside and Hellenised Jews in Jerusalem.[29][30][31] According to Joseph P. Schultz, modern scholarship, "considers the Maccabean revolt less as an uprising against foreign oppression than as a civil war between the orthodox and reformist parties in the Jewish camp."[32] In the conflict over the office of High Priest, traditionalists with Hebrew/Aramaic names like Onias contested against Hellenisers with Greek names like Jason or Menelaus.[33] Other authors point to social and economic factors in the conflict.[34][35] What began as a civil war took on the character of an invasion when the Hellenistic kingdom of Syria sided with theHellenising Jews against the traditionalists.[36] As the conflict escalated, Antiochus prohibited the practices of the traditionalists, thereby, in a departure from usual Seleucid practice, banning the religion of an entire people.[35] Other scholars argue that while the rising began as a religious rebellion, it was gradually transformed into a war of national liberation.[37]
The two greatest twentieth-century scholars of the Maccabean revolt, Elias Bickermann and Victor Tcherikover, each placed the blame on the policies of the Jewish leaders and not on the Seleucid ruler, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, but for different reasons.
Bickermann saw the origin of the problem in the attempt of "Hellenised" Jews to reform the "antiquated" and "outdated" religion practised in Jerusalem, and to rid it of superstitious elements. They were the ones who egged on Antiochus IV and instituted the religious reform in Jerusalem. One suspects that [Bickermann] may have been influenced in his view by an antipathy to Reform Judaism in 19th- and 20th-century Germany. Tcherikover, perhaps influenced by socialist concerns, saw the uprising as one of the rural peasants against the rich elite.[38]
According to I and II Maccabees, the priestly family ofMattathias (Mattitiyahu in Hebrew), which came to be known as theMaccabees,[39] called the people forth to holy war against the Seleucids. Mattathias' sonsJudas (Yehuda),Jonathan (Yonoson/Yonatan), and Simon (Shimon) began a military campaign, initially with disastrous results: one thousand Jewish men, women, and children were killed by Seleucid troops duringSabbath as they refused to fight on the holy day. After that, other Jews accepted that when attacked on the Sabbath they should fight back.
Eventually the use ofguerrilla warfare practices by Judah over several years gave control of the country to the Maccabees:
It was now, in the fall of 165, that Judah's successes began to disturb the central government. He appears to have controlled the road from Jaffa to Jerusalem, and thus to have cut off the royal party in Acra from direct communication with the sea and thus with the government. It is significant that this time the Syrian troops, under the leadership of the governor-general Lysias, took the southerly route, by way of Idumea.[40]
Towards the end of 164 BC, after reaching a compromise withLysias (who retreated toAntioch perhaps for political reasons following the death of Antiochus IV who died while campaigning against theParthians),[41] Judas entered Jerusalem and re-established the formal religious worship of Yahweh. The feast ofHanukkah was instituted to commemorate the recovery of the temple.[42]
Around April 162 Judas laid siege toAcra, which had remained under Seleucids control, as a response Lysias returned to fight the jews in theBattle of Beth Zechariah, but despite the positive outcome of the battle, the resistance of the Maccabees in the mountains of Aphairema (near the original center of the revolt)[43] and troubles in his own home country, prompted by the political situation surrounding the youngAntiochus V Eupator successor of Antiochus IV, forced Lysias to once again negotiate peace with the Maccabees, renouncing to his siege of Jerusalem in exchange for the Maccabean siege toAcra.[note 1]
In 161, while on his way to assume governorshipNicanor, the newly appointedstrategos of the region, won a skirmish against Simon, and while in Jerusalem, despite 2 Maccabees describing good initial relations between him and Judas(including the appointment to an official position), he eventually tried of have the latter arrested. Judas was however able to flee to the countryside and, after defeating Nicanor and the small contingent under him that was giving chase, he later managed to win a decisive battle atAdasa where Nicanor was killed (ib. 7:26–50), granting Judas once again control over Jerusalem. At this point, strong of his multiple wins over the Seleucids, he sent Eupolemus the son of Johanan and Jason the son ofEleazar as a diplomatic party "to make a league of amity and confederacy with the Romans."[45]
However on the same year, Antiochus V was soon succeeded by his cousinDemetrius I Soter, whose throne his father had usurped. Demetrius, after getting rid of Antiochus and Lysas, sent the generalBacchides to Israel with a large army, in order to installAlcimus to the office of high priest.After Bacchides carried out a massacre in Galilee and Alcimus thus claimed to be in a better position than Judas to protect the Hebrew population, the Hasmonean leader prepared to meet the Seleucid general in battle; the unorthodox route Bacchides took however (through MountBeth El) may have surprised Judas's forces, two thirds of which, finding themselves greatly outnumbered in an open field battle, didn't actually fight. In what is known as theBattle of Elasa (Laisa), Judas choose to fight against all odds and aimed to win by charging the right flank where Bacchides would be located and decapitate the Seleucid army as he did with Nicanor's. After what the sources describe as a battle that lasted 'from morning to evening', the Seleucid cavalry was able to cut off Judas, and it ultimately was the Jewish army who was dispersed after the loss of their leader.
Upon Judas's death, the persecuted patriots, under his brother Jonathan, fled beyond the Jordan River. (ib. 9:25–27) They set camp near a morass by the name of Asphar, and remained, after several engagements with the Seleucids, in theswamp in the country east of the Jordan.
Following the death of hispuppet High PriestAlcimus in 159 BC, Bacchides felt secure enough to leave the country, but two years later, theCity of Acre contacted Demetrius and requested the return of Bacchides to deal with the Maccabean threat. Jonathan and Simeon, wise of 10 years worth of experience inguerrilla warfare, thought it well to retreat farther, and accordingly fortified a place named Beth-hogla in the desert,[46] where they werebesieged several days by Bacchides. Jonathan offered the rival general apeace treaty and exchange ofprisoners of war which Bacchides readily consented to, and even took anoath of nevermore making war upon Jonathan. Bacchius and his forces then left Israel and nothing is reported for the five following years (158–153 BC), as the chief source (1 Maccabees) reports: "Thus the sword ceased from Israel. Jonathan settled inMichmash and began to judge the people; and he destroyed thegodless and theapostate out of Israel".[47]
An important external event brought the design of the Maccabeans to fruition.Demetrius I Soter's relations withAttalus II Philadelphus ofPergamon (reigned 159–138 BC),Ptolemy VI of Egypt (reigned 163–145 BC), and Ptolemy's co-rulerCleopatra II of Egypt were deteriorating, and they supported a rival claimant to the Seleucid throne:Alexander Balas, who purported to be the son ofAntiochus IV Epiphanes and a first cousin of Demetrius. Demetrius was forced to recall the garrisons of Judea, except those in the City of Acre and at Beth-zur, to bolster his strength. Furthermore, he made a bid for the loyalty of Jonathan, permitting him to recruit an army and to reclaim the hostages kept in the City of Acre. Jonathan gladly accepted these terms, took up residence at Jerusalem in 153 BC, and began fortifying the city.
Alexander Balas offered Jonathan even more favourable terms, including official appointment asHigh Priest in Jerusalem, and despite a second letter from Demetrius promising prerogatives that were almost impossible to guarantee,[48] Jonathan declared allegiance to Balas. Jonathan became the official religious leader of his people, and officiated at theFeast of Tabernacles of 153 BC wearing the High Priest's garments. The Hellenistic party could no longer attack him without severe consequences. Hasmoneansheld the office of High Priest continuously until 37 BC.
Soon, Demetrius lost both his throne and his life, in 150 BC. The victorious Alexander Balas was given the further honour of marriage toCleopatra Thea, daughter of his allies Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II. Jonathan was invited to Ptolemais for the ceremony, appearing with presents for both kings, and was permitted to sit between them as their equal; Balas even clothed him with his own royal garment and otherwise accorded him high honour. Balas appointed Jonathan asstrategos and "meridarch" (i.e., civil governor of a province; details not found in Josephus), sent him back with honours to Jerusalem,[49] and refused to listen to the Hellenistic party's complaints against Jonathan.
In 147 BC,Demetrius II Nicator, a son of Demetrius I Soter, claimed Balas' throne. The governor ofCoele-Syria, Apollonius Taos, used the opportunity to challenge Jonathan to battle, saying that the Jews might for once leave themountains and venture out into theplain.[50] Jonathan and Simeon led a force of 10,000 men against Apollonius' forces inJaffa, which was unprepared for the rapid attack and opened the gates in surrender to the Jewish forces. Apollonius received reinforcements fromAzotus and appeared in the plain in charge of 3,000 men including superior cavalry forces. Jonathan assaulted, captured and burned Azotus along with the resident temple ofDagon and the surrounding villages.
Alexander Balas honoured the victorious High Priest by giving him the city ofEkron along with its outlying territory. The people of Azotus complained to King Ptolemy VI, who had come to make war upon his son-in-law, but Jonathan met Ptolemy at Jaffa in peace and accompanied him as far as the River Eleutherus. Jonathan then returned to Jerusalem, maintaining peace with the King of Egypt despite their support for different contenders for the Seleucid throne.[51]
In 145 BC, theBattle of Antioch resulted in the final defeat of Alexander Balas by the forces of his father-in-law Ptolemy VI. Ptolemy himself, however, was among the casualties of the battle. Demetrius II Nicator remained sole ruler of the Seleucid Empire and became the second husband ofCleopatra Thea.
Jonathan owed no allegiance to the new King and took this opportunity to lay siege to theAcra, the Seleucid fortress in Jerusalem and the symbol of Seleucid control over Judea. It was heavily garrisoned by a Seleucid force and offered asylum to Jewish Hellenists.[52] Demetrius was greatly incensed; he appeared with an army at Ptolemais and ordered Jonathan to come before him. Without raising the siege, Jonathan, accompanied by the elders and priests, went to the king and pacified him with presents, so that the king not only confirmed him in his office of high priest, but gave to him the threeSamaritantoparchies ofMount Ephraim,Lod, andRamathaim-Zophim. In consideration of a present of 300talents the entire country was exempted fromtaxes, the exemption being confirmed in writing. Jonathan in return lifted the siege of the Acra and left it in Seleucid hands.
Soon, however, a new claimant to the Seleucid throne appeared in the person of the youngAntiochus VI Dionysus, son of Alexander Balas and Cleopatra Thea. He was three years old at most, but generalDiodotus Tryphon used him to advance his own designs on the throne. In the face of this new enemy, Demetrius not only promised to withdraw the garrison from the City of Acre, but also called Jonathan his ally and requested him to send troops. The 3,000 men of Jonathan protected Demetrius in his capital,Antioch, against his own subjects.[53]As Demetrius II did not keep his promise, Jonathan thought it better to support the new king when Diodotus Tryphon and Antiochus VI seized the capital, especially as the latter confirmed all his rights and appointed his brother Simon (Simeon)strategos of theParalia (the sea coast), from the "Ladder ofTyre" to the frontier ofEgypt.[54]
Jonathan and Simon were now entitled to make conquests;Ashkelon submitted voluntarily while Gaza was forcibly taken. Jonathan vanquished even the strategoi of Demetrius II far to the north, in the plain of Hazar, while Simon at the same time took the strong fortress of Beth-zur on the pretext that it harboured supporters of Demetrius.[55] Like Judas in former years, Jonathan sought alliances with foreign peoples. He renewed the treaty with the Roman Republic and exchanged friendly messages withSparta and other places. However, the documents referring to those diplomatic events are of questionable authenticity.
Diodotus Tryphon went with an army to Judea and invited Jonathan toScythopolis for a friendly conference, where he persuaded him to dismiss his army of 40,000 men, promising to give him Ptolemais and other fortresses. Jonathan fell into the trap; he took with him to Ptolemais 1,000 men, all of whom were slain; he himself was taken prisoner.[56]
When Diodotus Tryphon was about to enter Judea at Hadid, he was confronted by the new Jewish leader, Simon, ready for battle. Tryphon, avoiding an engagement, demanded one hundred talents and Jonathan's two sons as hostages, in return for which he promised to liberate Jonathan. Although Simon did not trust Diodotus Tryphon, he complied with the request so that he might not be accused of the death of his brother. But Diodotus Tryphon did not liberate his prisoner; angry that Simon blocked his way everywhere and that he could accomplish nothing, he executed Jonathan atBaskama, in the country east of the Jordan.[57] Jonathan was buried by Simeon atModin. Nothing is known of his two captive sons. One of his daughters was an ancestor of Josephus.[58]
Simon assumed the leadership (142 BC), receiving the double office of High Priest andEthnarch (Prince) of Israel. The leadership of the Hasmoneans was established by a resolution, adopted in 141 BC, at a large assembly "of the priests and the people and of the elders of the land, to the effect that Simon should be their leader and High Priest forever, until there should arise afaithful prophet" (1 Macc. 14:41). Ironically, the election was performed in Hellenistic fashion.
Simon, having made the Jewish people semi-independent of the Seleucid Greeks, reigned from 142 to 135 BC and formed the Hasmonean dynasty, finally capturing thecitadel [Acra] in 141 BC.[59][60] The Roman Senate accorded the new dynasty recognitionc. 139 BC, when the delegation of Simon was in Rome.[61]
Simon led the people in peace and prosperity, until in February 135 BC, he wasassassinated at the instigation of his son-in-lawPtolemy, son ofAbubus (also spelled Abobus or Abobi), who had been named governor of the region by the Seleucids. Simon's eldest sons, Mattathias and Judah, were also murdered.
After achieving semi-independency from the Seleucid Empire, the dynasty began to expand into the neighboring regions.Perea was conquered already byJonathan Apphus, subsequentlyJohn Hyrcanus conqueredSamaria andIdumea,Aristobulus I conquered the territory ofGalilee, andAlexander Jannaeus conquered the territory ofIturea. In addition to territorial conquests, the Hasmonean rulers, initially reigning only as rebel leaders, gradually assumed the religious office ofHigh Priest during the reign of Jonathan Apphus in 152 BC and the monarchical title ofEthnarch during the reign ofSimon Thassi in 142 BC, eventually assuming the title of King (basileus) in 104 BC by Aristobulus I.
Inc. 135 BC, John Hyrcanus, Simon's third son, assumed the leadership as both the High Priest (Kohen Gadol) and Ethnarch, taking a Greek "regnal name" (seeHyrcania) in an acceptance of theHellenistic culture of hisSeleucidsuzerains. Within a year of the death of Simon,Seleucid KingAntiochus VII Sidetes attacked Jerusalem. According toJosephus,[62]John Hyrcanus opened KingDavid'ssepulchre and removed three thousand talents which he paid astribute to spare the city. He managed to retain governorship as aSeleucidvassal and for the next two decades of his reign, Hyrcanus continued, like his father, to rule semi-autonomously from the Seleucids.
The Seleucid empire had been disintegrating in the face of theSeleucid–Parthian wars and in 129 BCAntiochus VII Sidetes was killed inMedia by the forces ofPhraates II of Parthia, permanently ending Seleucid rule east of theEuphrates. In 116 BC, a civil war between Seleucid half-brothersAntiochus VIII Grypus andAntiochus IX Cyzicenus broke out, and it was in this moment of division of the already significantly reduced kingdom that semi-independent Seleucid client states such as Judea found an opportunity to revolt.[63][64][65] In 110 BC,John Hyrcanus carried out the first military conquests of the newly independent Hasmonean kingdom, raising a mercenary army to captureMadaba andSchechem, significantly increasing his regional influence.[66][67][full citation needed]
Hyrcanus conqueredTransjordan,Samaria,[68] andIdumea[better source needed] (also known asEdom), and forced Idumeans to convert to Judaism:
Hyrcanus ... subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, (25) and of the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.[69]
Hyrcanus desired for his wife to succeed him as head of the government, but upon his death in 104 BC, the eldest of his five sons,Aristobulus I, whom he had wished to provide only with the title of High Priest, jailed his three brothers (includingAlexander Jannaeus) and his mother, starving her to death. By those means he came into possession of the throne and became the first Hasmonean to take the title ofBasileus, asserting the new-found independence of the state. Subsequently he conqueredGalilee.[70] Aristobulus I died after a painful illness in 103 BC.
Aristobulus' brothers were freed from prison by his widow; one of them,Alexander Jannaeus, reigned as a king as well as a high priest from 103–76 BC. During his reign he conqueredIturea and, according to Josephus, forcibly converted Itureans to Judaism.[71][72]
In 93 BC at theBattle of Gadara, Jannaeus and his forces were ambushed in a hilly area by theNabataeans, who saw the Hasmoneans' Transjordanian acquisitions as a threat to their interests, and Jannaeus was "lucky to escape alive".After this defeat, Jannaeus returned to fierce Jewish opposition in Jerusalem, and had to cede the Transjordan territories to the Nabataeans just so he could dissuade them from supporting his opponents in Judea;[73] according to Josephus, inc. 87 BC, six year into the civil war (which involved even the Seleucid kingDemetrius III Eucaerus), he crucified 800 Jewish rebels in Jerusalem.
He died during the siege of the fortressRagaba and was followed by his wife,Salome Alexandra, who reigned from 76 to 67 BC. She was the onlyregnant Jewish Queen in the Second Temple period, having followed usurper QueenAthalia who had reigned centuries prior. During Alexandra's reign, her sonHyrcanus II held the office of High Priest and was named her successor.
Pharisees andSadducees were rivalsects of Judaism, all through the Hasmonean period, they functioned primarily as political factions.
One of the factors that distinguished the Pharisees (which are first mentioned by Josephus in connection withJonathan ("Ant." xiii. 5, § 9)) from other groups prior to the destruction of the Temple was their belief that all Jews had to observe the purity laws (which applied to the Temple service) outside the Temple. The major difference, however, was the continued adherence of the Pharisees to the laws and traditions of the Jewish people in the face of assimilation. As Josephus noted, the Pharisees were considered the most expert and accurate expositors of Jewish law.Later texts such as the Mishnah and the Talmud record a host of rulings ascribed to the Pharisees concerning sacrifices and other ritual practices in the Temple, torts, criminal law, and governance. The influence of the Pharisees over the lives of the common people remained strong, and their rulings on Jewish law were deemed authoritative by many. Although these texts were written long after these periods, many scholars believe that they are a fairly reliable account of history during theSecond Temple period.
Although the Pharisees had opposed the wars of expansion of the Hasmoneans and the forced conversions of the Idumeans, the political rift between them became wider when Pharisees demanded that the Hasmonean kingAlexander Jannaeus choose between being king and being High Priest. In response, the king openly sided with the Sadducees by adopting their rites in the Temple. His actions caused a riot in the Temple and led to a brief civil war that ended with a bloody repression of the Pharisees, although at his deathbed the king called for a reconciliation between the two parties.
However, Alexander was succeeded by his widow,Salome Alexandra, who Josephus attests as having been very favourably inclined toward the Pharisees, her brotherShimon ben Shetach being a leading Pharisee himself, tremendously increasing their political influence under her reign, especially in the institution known as theSanhedrin.
Upon her death her elder son,Hyrcanus II, sought Pharisee support and her younger son,Aristobulus II, sought the support of the Sadducees; Hyrcanus, had scarcely reigned three months when his younger brother, Aristobulus, rose in rebellion. The conflict between them only ended when the Roman general Pompey captured Jerusalem in 63 BC and inaugurated the Roman period of Jewish history.
According to Josephus: "Now Hyrcanus was heir to the kingdom, and to him did his mother commit it before she died; but Aristobulus was superior to him in power and magnanimity; and when there was a battle between them, to decide the dispute about the kingdom, near Jericho, the greatest part deserted Hyrcanus, and went over to Aristobulus."[74]
Hyrcanus then took refuge in the citadel of Jerusalem, but the eventual capture of the Temple by Aristobulus II compelled him to surrender. A peace was concluded, according to the terms of which Hyrcanus was to renounce the throne and the office of high priest (comp.Emil Schürer, "Gesch." i. 291, note 2), but was to retain the revenues of his previous role, as Josephus states: "but Hyrcanus, with those of his party who stayed with him, fled to Antonia, and got into his power the hostages (which were Aristobulus's wife, with her children) that he might persevere; but the parties came to an agreement before things should come to extremes, that Aristobulus should be king, and Hyrcanus should resign, but retain all the rest of his dignities, as being the king's brother. Hereupon they were reconciled to each other in the Temple, and embraced one another in a very kind manner, while the people stood round about them; they also changed their houses, while Aristobulus went to the royal palace, and Hyrcanus retired to the house of Aristobulus."[74] Aristobulus then ruled from 67–63 BC.
From 63 to 40 BC, the official government (by this time reduced to a protectorate of Rome as described below) was back in the hands of Hyrcanus II as High Priest andEthnarch, although effective power was in the hands of his adviserAntipater the Idumaean.
While Hyrcanus had retired to private life,Antipater the Idumean, governor of Idumea, began to impress upon his mind that Aristobulus was planning his death, finally persuading him to take refuge withAretas, king of theNabatæans. Aretas, bribed by Antipater, who also promised him the restitution of the Arabian towns taken by the Hasmoneans, readily espoused the cause of Hyrcanus and advanced toward Jerusalem with an army of fifty thousand. During the siege, which lasted several months, the adherents of Hyrcanus were guilty of two acts that greatly incensed the majority of the Jews: they stoned the pious Onias (seeHoni ha-Magel) and when the besieged paid the besiegers to receive sacrificial lambs for the purpose of thepaschal sacrifice, they instead sent a pig.[note 2]
While this civil war was going on, the Roman generalMarcus Aemilius Scaurus went to Syria to take possession of the kingdom of theSeleucids, in the name ofGnaeus Pompeius Magnus. Each of the brothers appealed to him through gifts and promises: Scaurus, moved by a gift of four hundred talents, decided in favour of Aristobulus; Aretas was ordered to withdraw his army from Judea and while retreating suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of Aristobulus himself.
But the situation changed when Pompey, who had just been awarded the title "Conqueror of Asia" due to his decisive victories in Asia Minor overPontus and the Seleucid Empire, came to Syria (63 BC) having decided to bring Judea under the rule of the Romans. The two brothers, as well as a third party which, weary of Hasmonean quarrels, desired the extinction of the dynasty, sent delegates to Pompey; who delayed the decision and eventually, in spite of Aristobulus' gift of a golden vine valued at five hundred talents, decided that Hyrcanus II would have made a more acceptable ward of Rome than his brother. Aristobulus fathomed the designs of Pompey and assembled his armies; but Pompey was able to defeat him multiple times and capture his cities, so he entrenched himself in the fortress ofAlexandrium. Soon realising the futility of resistance however, he surrendered at the first summons of the Romans, and decided to deliver Jerusalem to them. Despite this, the patriots were not willing to open their gates to the Romans, and asiege ensued which ended in the capture of the city.
Pompey entered theHoly of Holies (this was only the second time that someone had dared to penetrate into this sacred spot).Judaea had to pay tribute to Rome and was placed under the supervision of the Roman governor of Syria. Aristobulus was taken to Rome a prisoner, and Hyrcanus was restored to his position as High Priest but not to the Kingship. Political authority rested with the Romans whose interests were represented by Antipater. This factually ended the Hasmoean rule of the area and Jewish independence.[75][76]
In 57–55 BC,Aulus Gabinius, proconsul ofSyria, split the former Hasmonean Kingdom into Galilee, Samaria, and Judea, with five districts of legal and religious councils known assanhedrin (Greek: συνέδριον, "synedrion"): "And when he had ordained five councils (συνέδρια), he distributed the nation into the same number of parts. So these councils governed the people; the first was at Jerusalem, the second atGadara, the third at Amathus, the fourth atJericho, and the fifth atSepphoris in Galilee."[77][78]
When, in 50 BC, it appeared thatJulius Caesar was interested in using Aristobulus and his family as hisclients to take control of Judea from Hyrcanus II and Antipater, who were in turn clients of Pompey, the supporters of the latter had Aristobulus poisoned in Rome and executed Alexander inAntioch.
However, Hyrcanus and Antipater would soon turn to the other side:
At the beginning of the civil war between [Caesar] and Pompey, Hyrcanus, at the instance of Antipater, prepared to support the man to whom he owed his position; but after Pompey was murdered in Egypt, Antipater led the Jewish forces to the help of Caesar, who was besieged at Alexandria. His timely help and his influence over the Egyptian Jews won the favour of Caesar, and secured him an extension of his authority in Palestine, while Hyrcanus was confirmed the title ofethnarch. Joppa was restored to the Hasmonean domain, Judea was granted freedom from all tribute and taxes to Rome, and the independence of the internal administration was guaranteed."[79]
Antipater and Hyrcanus's newly won favour led the triumphant Caesar to ignore the claims of Aristobulus's younger son,Antigonus the Hasmonean, and to confirm them in their authority, despite their previous allegiance to Pompey. Josephus noted,
Antigonus... came to Caesar... and accused Hyrcanus and Antipater, how they had driven him and his brethren entirely out of their native country... and that as to the assistance they had sent [to Caesar] into Egypt, it was not done out of good-will to him, but out of the fear they were in from former quarrels, and in order to gain pardon for their friendship to [his enemy] Pompey.[80]
Hyrcanus II' restoration asethnarch in 47 BC coincided with Caesar's appointment of Antipater as the firstProcurator ofJudea (Roman province) "Caesar appointed Hyrcanus to be high priest, and gave Antipater what principality he himself should choose, leaving the determination to himself; so he made him procurator of Judea."[81]
Antipater appointed his sons to positions of influence: Phasael became Governor of Jerusalem, and Herod Governor of Galilee. This led to increasing tension between Hyrcanus and the family of Antipater, culminating in a trial of Herod for supposed abuses in his governorship, which resulted in Herod's flight into exile in 46 BC. Herod soon returned, however, and the honours to Antipater's family continued. Hyrcanus' incapacity and weakness were so manifest that, when he defended Herod against theSanhedrin and beforeMark Antony, the latter stripped Hyrcanus of his nominal political authority and his title, bestowing them both upon the accused.
Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC spreading unrest and confusion throughout the Roman world, including Judaea. Shortly thereafter, Antipater the Idumean was assassinated in 43 BC by the Nabatean king,Malichus I, who had bribed one of Hyrcanus' cup-bearers to poison him. However, Antipater's sons managed to maintain their control over Hyrcanus and Judea.
In 40 BC aParthian army crossed the Euphrates, joined byQuintus Labienus, a Roman republican general, who was once sent as ambassador to the Parthians, and who now, following the events of theLiberators' civil war, assisted them in their invasion of Roman territories, and was able to entice Mark Antony's Roman garrisons around Syria to rally to his cause.
The Parthians split their army, and underPacorus conquered theLevant:
Antigonus... roused the Parthians to invade Syria and Palestine, [and] the Jews eagerly rose in support of the scion of the Maccabean house, and drove out the hated Idumeans with their puppet Jewish king. The struggle between the people and the Romans had begun in earnest, and though Antigonus, when placed on the throne by the Parthians, proceeded to spoil and harry the Jews, rejoicing at the restoration of the Hasmonean line, thought a new era of independence had come.[82]
When Antipater's sonPhasael andHyrcanus II set out on an embassy to the Parthians which got captured, Antigonus, who was present, cut off Hyrcanus's ears to make him unsuitable for the High Priesthood, while Phasael in fear of humilation and torture, killed himself. Antigonus, whose Hebrew name was Mattathias, bore the double title of king and High Priest for only three years, as he had not disposed of Antipater's other sonHerod, the most dangerous of his enemies.
Herod fled into exile and sought the support of Mark Antony. He was designated "King of the Jews" by theRoman Senate in 40 BC as Antony
then resolved to get [Herod] made king of the Jews...[and] told [the Senate] that it was for their advantage in theParthian war that Herod should be king; so they all gave their votes for it. And when the senate was separated, Antony andCaesar [Augustus] went out, with Herod between them; while the consul and the rest of the magistrates went before them, in order to offer sacrifices [to the Roman gods], and to lay the decree in the Capitol. Antony also made a feast for Herod on the first day of his reign.[83][unreliable source?]
The struggle thereafter lasted for some years, as the main Roman forces were occupied with defeating the Parthians and had few additional resources to use to support Herod. After the Parthians' defeat however, in 37 BC Herod was victorious over his rival; Antigonus was delivered to Antony, executed and the Romans assented to Herod's proclamation as King of the Jews, bringing about the end of the Hasmonean rule over Judea.
Antigonus was not the last Hasmonean; however, the fate of the remaining male members of the family under Herod was not a happy one.Aristobulus III, grandson of Aristobulus II through his elder son Alexander, was briefly made high priest, but was soon executed (36 BC) due to Herod's jealousy. His sister Mariamne was married to Herod,[84]but also fell victim to his jealousy. Her sons by Herod,Aristobulus IV and Alexander, were in their adulthood also executed by their father.
Hyrcanus II had been held by the Parthians since 40 BC. For four years he lived amid theBabylonian Jews, who paid him every mark of respect. However, in 36 BC Herod, who feared that the last remaining male Hasmonean might gain the support of the Parthians to retake the throne, invited him to return to Jerusalem. The Babylonian Jews warned him in vain as Herod received him with every mark of respect, assigning him the first place at his table and the presidency of the state council, while awaiting an opportunity to get rid of him. As a Hasmonean, Hyrcanus was too dangerous a rival for Herod. In the year 30 BC, charged with plotting with the King of Arabia, Hyrcanus was condemned and executed.
The later Herodian rulersAgrippa I andAgrippa II both had Hasmonean blood, as Agrippa I's father wasAristobulus IV, son of Herod byMariamne I, but they were not direct male descendants. The Hasmoneans did not have defined rules for succession and Agrippa was viewed as legitimate via his grandmother, Mariamne I.
In hisHistories,Tacitus explained the background for the establishment of the Hasmonean state:
While the East was under the dominion of the Assyrians, Medes, and Persians, the Jews were regarded as the meanest of their subjects: but after the Macedonians gained supremacy, King Antiochus endeavored to abolish Jewish superstition and to introduce Greek civilization; the war with the Parthians, however, prevented his improving this basest of peoples; for it was exactly at that time that Arsaces had revolted. Later on, since the power of Macedon had waned, the Parthians were not yet come to their strength, and the Romans were far away, the Jews selected their own kings. These in turn were expelled by the fickle mob; but recovering their throne by force of arms, they banished citizens, destroyed towns, killed brothers, wives, and parents, and dared essay every other kind of royal crime without hesitation; but they fostered the national superstition, for they had assumed the priesthood to support their civil authority.[85]
While the Hasmonean dynasty managed to create an independent Jewish kingdom, its successes were rather short-lived, and the dynasty by and large failed to live up to the nationalistic momentum the Maccabee brothers had gained.
The fall of the Hasmonean Kingdom marked an end to a century of Jewish self-governance, but its legacy continued to shape Jewish political consciousness under Roman rule. The memory of Judea as an independent Jewish state made the idea of restored sovereignty a persistent aspiration among the population.[86] The Hasmonean precedent, unique in having established a national state under indigenous leadership in a world dominated by imperial powers, left a lasting imprint on Jewish collective identity and helped cultivate a strong sense of national awareness.[87] This consciousness contributed to later efforts to revive political independence, which culminated in the majorJewish uprisings against Rome in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD.[86][87]
During the wars, temporary commonwealths were established, but they ultimately fell to the sustained might of Rome. In theFirst Jewish–Roman War (66–73 AD),Roman legions underVespasian andTitusbesieged and destroyed Jerusalem, looted and burnedHerod's Temple (in the year 70) and Jewish strongholds (notably Gamla in 67 andMasada in 73 AD), andenslaved ormassacred a large part of the Jewish population. TheBar Kokhba revolt (132–136 AD) proved even more devastating, resulting in the widespread depopulation of Judea and a shift of the Jewish demographic and cultural center to Galilee. The defeat of the Jewish revolts against the Roman Empire notably contributed to the numbers and geography of theJewish diaspora, as many Jews were scattered after losing their state or were sold intoslavery throughout the empire.
Daniel R. Schwartz believes the thematic differences in 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees reflect the ideological divide on whether Jews should be oriented around religion or politics, in the form of Jewish theocracies and/or secular nationalism.[88]
Jewish tradition holds that the claiming of kingship by the later Hasmoneans led to their eventual downfall, since that title was only to be held by descendants of theline ofKing David.[89] The Hasmonean bureaucracy was filled with men with Greek names, and the dynasty eventually became veryHellenised, to the annoyance of many of its more traditionally-minded Jewish subjects.[90][91] Frequent dynastic quarrels also contributed to the view among Jews of later generations that the latter Hasmoneans were degenerate.[92] One member of this school was Josephus, whose accounts are in many cases the sole source of information about the Hasmoneans.
Since the 1990s, a growing body of research has explored several major changes in Jewish ideas and practice during the Hasmonean period.Shaye J. D. Cohen's 1999 book,The Beginnings of Jewishness posited that Jewish identity first began to transcend the Judean nationality and become a religious identity only in the late 2nd century BC, when the Hasmoneans began conquering and converting neighboring peoples to Judaism.[93]Reinhard Gregor Kratz's 2013 bookHistorisches und Biblisches Israel (published in English in 2015 asHistorical and Biblical Israel) argued that "biblical" and "non-biblical" Israelite/Jewish traditions existed for centuries in antiquity, with biblical Judaism only becoming predominant under the Hasmoneans.[94]John J. Collins's 2017 book,The Invention of Judaism, identified the mid-2nd century BC as the first time in which contemporary literature is focused on specific questions of Jewish law (halakha).[95] Finally, Yonatan Adler's 2022 book,The Origins of Judaism presented archaeological evidence that many standard Jewish religious practices—such askashrut and maintainingritual purity—were not commonly observed before Hasmonean rule.[96]
Since late in the 19th century, many scholars argued that there was an increase in the use of Hebrew language during the Hasmonean period. Indeed this idea finds both literary and archaeological support in recent scholarship.[97]
Hasmonean coins usually featured thePaleo-Hebrew script, an olderPhoenician script that was used to writeHebrew. The coins are struck only inbronze. The symbols include aMenorah,cornucopia, palm-branch,lily, an anchor, star,pomegranate and (rarely) a helmet. Despite the apparentSeleucid influences of most of the symbols, the origin of the star is more obscure.[98] Hasmonean coins are the first known coins in Judea to completely omit depictions of humans or animals, which Yonatan Adler posited was evidence that the Hasmoneans were the first Jewish authorities to enforce rules on creations of "graven images" in line with theTen Commandments.[99]
Modern scholarship on the other hand considers the Maccabean revolt less as an uprising against foreign oppression than as a civil war between the orthodox and reformist parties in the Jewish camp
barkochva334 was invoked but never defined (see thehelp page).Grypus Cyzicenus.
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)These changes accompanied and were partially caused by the great extension of the Judaeans' contacts with the peoples around them. Many historians have chronicled the Hasmonaeans' territorial acquisitions. In sum, it took them twenty-five years to win control of the tiny territory of Judaea and get rid of the Seleucid colony of royalist Jews (with, presumably, gentile officials and garrison) in Jerusalem. [...] However, in the last years before its fall, the Hasmonaeans were already strong enough to acquire, partly by negotiation, partly by conquest, a little territory north and south of Judaea and a corridor on the west to the coast at Jaffa/Joppa. This was briefly taken from them by Antiochus Sidetes, but soon regained, and in the half century from Sidetes' death in 129 to Alexander Jannaeus' death in 76 they overran most of Palestine and much of western and northern Transjordan. First John Hyrcanus took over the hills of southern and central Palestine (Idumaea and the territories of Shechem, Samaria and Scythopolis) in 128–104; then his son, Aristobulus I, took Galilee in 104–103, and Aristobulus' brother and successor, Jannaeus, in about eighteen years of warfare (103–96, 86–76) conquered and reconquered the coastal plain, the northern Negev, and western edge of Transjordan.
Herod could not secure the high priesthood for himself, but if he was to become a legitimate king it would have to be as a Hasmonean or at least as the legitimate successor of the Hasmoneans. To achieve such status, Herod used both his marriage and the children he produced from it to further insinuate himself into the ruling family and to bind his family closer to it.
| Traditions |
|  | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maccabean Revolt |
| |||||||||||||||
Authority control databases: National |
|---|
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_Colorized_per_source.jpg)
%2c_Hamadan_mint.jpg)
