Once in the midst of the discussion to leave the argument is proof of weakness of character. Better to take the own position to the the end of the conclusion where the entire criticism was intended than to surrender the truth in the view defended. I said before that in the root of the Civil War between Sadducees and Pharisees during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus it got to be seen the hate of the sons of the Maccabees against the sons of those Pharisees who left alone the Hero and his 800 men for the sake of their own power, which was threatened by the rising star of the Champion that God had giving to His People. Thopugh the brothers of Judas kept working with the Pharisees the breach grew wider and deeper, and the acceptance of Jonathan to the High Priesthood gave solid foundations to that repressed anger againsts the Pharisses, which had been controlled during the days of Simon and his son John Hyrcanus, but broke loose in the heart of Alexander Jannaeus after the death of his mother in the same prison where he had been thrown to meet death. The historian, in this case, Professor Graezt, reckon, talking about Internal Dissesssion, in the Chapter below, that "The disunion between the two parties had possibly been instrumental in separating the Assidaeans from the Hasmonaeans, thereby reducing the number of the Maccabaean warriors, a circumstance which may have helped to contribute to the fall of Judas". The Historian of the Jews blame the Call on the Romans as the root of that instrumental separation. The manipulation of the fact is so monstruous and horrendous as to cause a feeling of infinite sorry for the people to whom the History was shot. The trueth in the Betrayal of the Hero by the Pharisees lays at tge feet of their fear of the rising of Judas to tha position so high for them to put him dawon later on. Their fear was about the Hero claiming the throne as the final resort of the Independence of Judaea. The Hero got to be sacrificed, betrayed and surnender to the enemy as a token of the Fidelity of the Jews to the Law of God, the Throne was preserved for the House of David. In their self-claimed sanctity the Fact that the Hero was the Champion of the Lord and he was fighting God's Cause did not stopthem to play the part of Judas Iscariot. They thought the Victory of the Hero and the Hero himself was their work. Whether the Hero could have saved the day if the entire army of the Jews had done what was supposed to do, this is out of criticism; but that they killed the Hero for the sake of their fear, the Syrian just an instrument of their assassination, this is beyond doubt. Finding the Historian of the Jews himself in a position of impossibility to denying what as a Jews he was forced to do, he found the one to blame, always on the other side of the national borders, the Romans. This was and is the Method of the National Historian of the Jews from the days of Flavius Josephus, and that they made it work it is beyond dispute; but the Method of displacing Truth from the Science of History, this Method had no value whichsoever for the King of the Jews, Alexander Jannaeus, and in response to the killing of the 800 men of Judas the Maccabee, his blood ancestor, he killed 800 Pharisees in the eyes of all men. The Pharisees killed the Hero and his 800 men hiding themselves from the scene, as they had nothing to do with their assassination. Alexander Jannaeus did not hide from the world and did not dress with a holy Lie the assassination of the 800 Pharisees and his family in that day of madness and horror, conceived by him during the dead of his soul dead down there where his mother was left alone to die. So, if the Sadducees, as shown in the Chapters already imported in here, (see the last two sections), were the main cause of the repugnnace felt by the Seleucid Kings to their Religion and Temple, the struggle of the Pharisees against the Maccabees for Power was the root of the Civil War by which the Jews lost the Independence by the Maccabees won. To top this schizoid and fratricidalm, compulsive behavior not happy under the rule of the Romans they open the door to the Hall of the Throne of David to a Palestinian, Herod the Great. We got to be not very much witted to understand that if under the reign of Alexander Jannaeus the entire population of Judaea lived by a law of terror, under the reign of Herod the Jews lived under the law of Hell. And though you may find no difference between both laws, I tell you that there is a big difference between them. You can fight back terror; you may lose your body in the struggle; that is fine. Hell sucks your soul, empty your being of what is most precious, Inmortality. No wonder, then, that when their Messiah came around He found the Saduccees in a position of total enmity to the Inmorttality of the Soul. They had lost their soul under the law of Herod. These kinds of truth, the real Truth, the reader will find it not in the Historian of the Jews. I let you with the way they had of dealing with their own History. ...

 

CHAPTER XXIII.

VICTORIES AND DEATH OF JUDAS MACCABAEUS; JONATHAN THE HASMONEAN.

165—143 B.C.

 

The two decisive battles of Emmaus and Bethoron had entirely altered the position of Judaea. The imminent danger was averted. Three years and a half had passed since the beginning of the religious persecution and the desecration of the Temple (168—165), and, just as the Book of Daniel had prophesied, peace had followed the disastrous excitement of this period. Maccabeus and his followers took advantage of this fortunate moment to march into Jerusalem and to put an end to the desecration which had hitherto held sway there. The aspect of the holy city was deeply distressing to her faithful sons, who had shed their hearts’ blood to save her. The town looked like a desert, in which only her enemies were contending with one another. The Sanctuary was deserted, the doors were burnt, the porches were destroyed, idolatrous altars stood everywhere; the image of Zeus towered on the altar, an emblem of devastation, and statues of Antiochus insulted the Judaeans. But the holy warriors had not time to give vent to their sorrow at the general desecration, for they were forced to act quickly for fear of being disturbed in their work of purification. Their first duty was to destroy all statues of Jove, and to remove all unclean objects from the fore-courts (165). They also removed the altar, thinking it unworthy of their sacrifices after it had been so frequently polluted. A council of elders determined to place the stones of the altar in one of the porches of the entrance-court, and to keep them there until the Prophet Elijah should appear and decree what was to be done with them. Meanwhile a new altar was built, new doors were put up, and new vessels were brought to the Temple to replace the old ones. All these preparations were finished in three weeks, and early in the morning of the 25th Kislev (November), 165, the Temple was consecrated with sacrifices and thanks­givings. The two former consecrations certainly could not have been held with greater fervor and devotion. The purest feelings animated the congregation, and the mortal anguish, which they had endured for three years and a half, now gave place to feelings of joy and hope.

The consecration of the Temple not only denoted the victory of the weak over the strong, the faithful over the sinner, but also and especially, the victory of Judaism over Hellenic idolatry, of the God of Israel over idols. All the people from every town of Judaea took part in the festival, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem lit bright lamps in front of their houses as a symbol of the Law, called “Light” by the Poets. The Hasmonaean brothers and the other members of the Great Council decided that in future the week beginning on the 25th of Kislev should be held as a joyous festival, to commemorate the consecration of the Temple. Year after year the members of the House of Israel were to be reminded of the victory of a small body of men over a large army, and of the re-establishment of the Sanctuary. This decree was conscientiously carried out. For two thousand years these days have been celebrated as the “Days of Consecration” (Chanucah), and lamps have been lighted in every household in Israel. The days derived their name of “Feast of Lights” from this custom. Naturally, the same order now prevailed in the Temple as formerly. Priests and Levites were reinstated in their office; only those Aaronites who had taken part in idolatrous worship were expelled from the Sanctuary. This just severity produced bad results, and increased the difficulty of the position of the Judaeans. The priests who were Hellenists and followers of Menelaus thus, prevented from being reconciled with the representatives of the people, became more and more embittered in their hatred against the national pious party. Maccabaeus placed his soldiers on guard whilst the Temple was being restored, to prevent the Hellenists from hindering the people in their work, and as soon as the consecration was over, he built a high wall, skirting the hill of the Temple, and two strong towers, well garrisoned, to protect it from sudden attacks from the neighboring Birah or Acra. He took the precaution of protecting the country in different ways, as he foresaw that the people would have to fight more battles before they could secure their freedom. He also fortified Bethzur, the town from which Lysias had thought of starting with his army. This was to be in particular a stronghold against the Idumaeans. The victory of the heroes of Israel over the well-armed Syrian troops increased the burning hatred of the neighboring nations against the Judaeans, and united them in cruel enmity against the members of the people who dwelt amongst them, or who had fled to them for refuge. They either grudged them their victory or feared their superiority. The Philistines, in the south-west, the Phoenicians, in the north-west; the Ammonites, on the other side of the Jordan; the Syrians and Macedonians in the neighbourhood, and particularly the Idumaeans in the south, were alike imbued with hatred of the Judaeans.

When driven away from their homes by the Nabataeans, the Idumaeans had settled in the old Judaean territory, and had even taken possession of Hebron. They showed themselves the bitter enemies of the Judaeans in Antiochus’ time, just as they had done under Nebuchadnezzar’s despotism; they were ever on the watch for the fugitives, whom they ill-treated, and sometimes even killed. It was therefore very important to reduce them to subjection. Judas first undertook an expedition against the sons of Esau in Accrabattine, defeated them, and drove them from their dwelling-places. He then crossed the Jordan with his army, fought the Ammonites, who were led by a Syrian warrior, Timotheus, an implacable and indefatigable enemy of the Judaeans. When Judas had defeated him and the Ammonites, and had taken possession of their capital Rabbath-Ammon-Philadelphia, Timotheus sought shelter in the neighboring fortress Jaeser, commanded by his brother Chaireas. Twenty Judaean youths are reported to have shown wonderful valor by climbing the walls of this difficult fortress and making a breach for the troops to enter. Judas accomplished his object by taking Jaeser and the other towns; he obtained peace for the Judaeans residing in this part of the country, and inspired foreign nations with respect for the name of Israel.

The Judaean troops had hardly returned to Jerusalem before they received intelligence of the further ill-treatment of their Judaean brethren at the hands of their heathen neighbors. The Judaeans turned in their distress to Maccabaeus, as the Israelites had done of old to Saul. The inhabitants of Gilead and Bashan informed him by letter that the heathen tribes had collected, with Timotheus at their head, with the intention of utterly destroying them; that 1,000 Judaeans had been slaughtered in the province of Tobiene; that the women and children had been dragged into captivity, and that their property had been seized by the enemy. Messengers, with their garments rent asunder, followed upon this missive, bringing letters from the Galilean Judaeans, who were threatened with death by the inhabitants of Acco, Tyre and Zidon. They implored Judas to come to their aid before it was too late. He had no need to send messengers with threatening words, like Saul, to call together an army to the assistance of the threatened Jabesh-Gileadites, for he had the army about him, the whole fighting power of the land, who followed him gladly. Maccabaeus gave the command of one part of his army to his brother Simon, with orders to march to the assistance of the Judaeans of Galilee, whilst he and his brother Jonathan, with the other division, prepared to rescue his oppressed brethren on the opposite side of the Jordan. The rest of the Judaean forces, under the command of two leaders, were to guard the west boundary of Judaea from the inroads of the Philistines. Simon accomplished his task with rapidity and good-fortune. _ He began by hastening to Acco, where the Judaean inhabitants were being cruelly treated by the Greeks or Macedonians. His well-trained soldiers, meeting with some hostile forces, defeated them easily, put them to the rout and pursued them to the very walls of the sea-port. This successful feat of arms relieved him from the necessity of further engagements, fur the Macedonians of the neighboring towns did not venture upon encountering the Maccabaean troop. Simon was therefore able to progress un­molested through Galilee and to persuade the Judaeans of that province to migrate to Judaea.

A more laborious contest awaited Judas in the Transjordanic provinces, for on his march he again met with the obstinate hostility of Timotheus. As in former ages, the heights were still crowned with fortresses. However, Judas succeeded in reducing several of them; he razed their walls to the ground, disarmed their defenders and delivered some of his imprisoned countrymen. He then assembled the Judaean population, led them across the Jordan, through the friendly city of Bethshean (Scythopolis), and shortly before the celebration of the feast of Pentecost (May, 164) he returned to Jerusalem, with a number of emigrant Judaeans from Gilead. From all cities of Judaea the enthusiastic people streamed, to receive the victor and to celebrate the festival with feelings of joy and gratitude. New songs of praise resounded in the Temple.

But Judas soon recommenced hostilities, in order to avenge an injury which had been received. During his absence his two generals, Joseph, the son of Zachariah, and Azariah, whom he had left behind to guard the land in the west, had, contrary to his orders, attacked Georgias, who occupied Jamnia with a force; but they had suffered a defeat and had been driven back to the Judaean mountains. Judas therefore embarked on a new campaign. His arms were again crowned with success, he destroyed several cities on the sea-coast, together with their temples and idols.

Whilst the hero of the Maccabees had been making fearless warriors out of his miserable and trembling countrymen who lived hidden in caves, whilst he had been inspiring his people with self- confidence, and had been vanquishing the enemy far and near, the court of Syria had remained wrapped in the most complete indifference. What could have induced Lysias, who held the reins of government, to remain passive in the face of this daring defiance? Had he not the means of hiring mercenaries; or did he think the Judaeans invincible? It is said that a distinguished man at the Syrian court, named Ptolemy Alacron, had advocated the cause of the Judaeans, and had declared that the religious restraint imposed upon them was unjust. Suddenly important news came to Palestine concerning Antiochus Epiphanes. The progress of that monarch through Parthia had not been signalized by any military success; nor had he been able to refill his treasury. Driven by want of money, he undertook an expedition to the city of Susa, in Elymais, to plunder the Temple of the Goddess Anaitis; but the inhabitants resisted the invader and forced him to retreat. He fell sick in the Persian city of Tabae, and expired in frenzy (164). He who had derided the idea of a Divine Being and Divine justice, who had blasphemed with perfect equanimity all that men hold holy, lost all confidence in himself In consequence of the frustration of his plans. It is quite possible that on his death-bed, he may nave repented of his desecration of the Temple, and his attack of frenzy may have resulted from the stings of a remorseful conscience. At all events his last orders savor of madness, for he appointed one of his favorites, Philip, as regent of his kingdom and guardian of his young son Antiochus V, although previous to his departure for Persia, he had invested Lysias with absolute power. This, his dying act, of pitting two rival governors against one another, and at the same time, of dividing his country into factions, proved fatal to the Syrio-Macedonian kingdom, and to the Seleucid house.

The death of Antiochus produced no change in the position of the Judaeans. Lysias, who was guardian of the young king, Antiochus V (Eupator, from 164 to 162) undertook no expedition against the Judaeans. Judas Maccabaeus took advantage of this inactivity to improve the unsatisfactory internal condition of his country. At that time, there existed in Jerusalem two neighboring fortified places that were in daily feud with one another, namely the Sanctuary, and the fortress of the Acra, occupied by the Hellenists, who, with their pretended high-priest Menelaus, continued their hostilities against the patriotic and loyal Judaeans. In order to ward off their attacks upon the Temple, Judas had surrounded it with a high wall and with towers. But how long were these hostilities to continue? Judas Maccabaeus took measures to bring them to an end. He undertook the formal siege of the Acra, and raised earthworks on which he placed catapu1ts, to discharge stones against the walls.

In this emergency some of the Hellenists resolved to have recourse to the young king, Antiochus V (Eupator), and travelled for that purpose to Antioch. Upon their arrival, they declared that they had been cruelly ill-treated by the Judaean party, on account of their devotion to the royal cause; that they had been robbed of their property, and threatened with death. They also suggested to the king and his guardian, that if the Acra were allowed to fall into the hands of the Hasmonaeans, the rebellious Judaeans would be utterly unassailable. A council was thereupon held at the Syrian court, and it was agreed to commence hostile proceedings against the Hasmonaeans. Ptolemy Macron, who alone spoke in favor of peaceful measures, could gain no hearing.

The flame of war was thus rekindled in the spring of 163 BC It was an unfortunate time for the Judaeans, as this happened to be a sabbatical year, which was strictly kept by those who would have forfeited their lives for the Law. There could be neither sowing nor reaping, and the people had to content themselves with the fruits of the trees, and with the after growth of the soil, from the last harvest. The garrisons of the fortresses could not be supplied with food.

Lysias, accompanied by the royal child Eupator, and, at the head of a large army with elephants, marched towards the south side of Judaea. Judas could only send a small army into the field, as he required the greater number of his forces for the defence of the Temple and of the fortress of Bethzur. Thus he was compelled to restrict himself to defensive operations. But the garrison of Bethzur fought bravely, and attempted to destroy the siege-train of the invaders. Unfortunately, the scarcity of their provisions would not permit the beleaguered to undergo a long siege, and, moreover, they were betrayed by a traitor, Rodocus, who is accused of having revealed to the enemy the secret ways by which food was introduced into the fortress. At length famine and treachery compelled the garrison of Bethzur to surrender; but they were allowed free egress from the fortress. Relieved on this side, the Syrian army was now able to march upon Jerusalem. Nothing was left to Maccabeus but to meet them in the field. He advanced at the head of his troops to Beth-Zachariah, not far from Bethzur. The Judeans again performed prodigies of valor. Amongst many feats of self-sacrifice, the following is particularly mentioned: Eleazer, one of the Hasmonean brothers, thinking that the magnificently attired rider of an elephant was the king himself, crept boldly under the animal, stabbed it to death and fell crushed by its enormous weight. But in spite of the courage and daring of the Judeans, they were obliged to retreat before the superior numbers of the Syrians, Judas reentered Jerusalem and entrenched himself with his army in the Temple. Lysias soon followed and began a formal siege of the Sanctuary. Judas did not fail to defend himself, and also erected catapults. As the siege continued for a long time, the supplies, which were not plentiful on account of the sabbatical year, were soon consumed by the garrison. Tortured by hunger, the troops began to desert the fortress by subterranean passages. Only Judas Maccabeus, his three brothers, and a small band of devoted followers, remained steadfastly at their post of danger, defying the pangs of hunger. Jerusalem, or more properly speaking, its last place of refuge, the Temple, was very nearly falling, as in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, through want of food; but help came unexpectedly.

Philip, who had been named regent of Syria, by the dying king Antiochus Epiphanes, had raised a large army of Medo-Persians, and was marching upon Antioch to deprive Lysias of the rule. As soon as Lysias heard of the advance of his rival, he was forced to withdraw his troops from Jerusalem to lead them against this new enemy. He therefore persuaded the young king to make peace with the Judeans, and thus a treaty was concluded, the chief condition being that the Judeans should enjoy complete religious freedom, and that the fortress of the Temple should remain inviolate. Lysias agreed by oath to these conditions, but as soon as the gates of the fortress were opened, he ordered his soldiers to raze the walls and the towers to the ground. In no other way, however, did he seek to molest the Judeans, for he neither destroyed nor desecrated the Sanctuary, and he soon commenced his march to Syria, where Philip had taken possession of the capital. Thus the numerous battles of the Hasmoneans were crowned after all with success, and the Judaeans were once more permitted to enjoy religious liberty, and were no longer compelled to sacrifice to Jupiter.

But these wars had another fortunate result: the Syrian court withdrew its protection from the Hellenists, who were obliged to leave their fortress in the Acra. Menelaus, the pretended high priest, the author of untold misery, was sacrificed by Lysias. The latter looked upon him as a firebrand, and had him executed in Beroea (Aleppo), after he had, for ten years, stained his priestly diadem by the most execrable conduct. Jason, who had not rivaled Menelaus in crime, but who had done his best to disturb the peace of his country, had expired somewhat earlier in a foreign land. Persecuted by Antiochus Epiphanes, and driven by the Nabataean prince, Aretas, out of his country, he had fled to Egypt, but finding no safety there, had wandered from town to town, until, at last, he had found a grave in Sparta.

The truce between the Syrian court and the Judaean people restored peace and order to the country; it was therefore possible and necessary to elect a new high priest, and who could be found worthier of that holy office than Judas Maccabaeus? The great Hasmonaean hero was most probably raised to that dignity by Antiochus Eupator, or by his guardian Lysias.

During these days of peace, the warrior was able to lay aside his arms, the peasant to till his fields, and the scribe to devote himself to the explanation of the Law; for the bleeding wounds of the commonwealth began at length to close and to heal; but peace was not to be of long duration.

The excitement, resulting from years of Civil warfare, was not so easily allayed, and a veil could hardly be thrown over the past. There were Hellenists who, both openly and secretly, hated Judas Maccabaeus and his devoted adherents, especially the Chassidim, on account of the restraint imposed upon them and the frustration of their efforts. Prince Demetrius, who had been debarred from the succession to the throne of Syria, by his uncle Antiochus Epiphanes, and who had been left by that monarch as hostage in Rome, seized upon a favorable opportunity for quitting that city to depose the son of the usurper and his guardians.

Hereupon Rome sent one of its severest censors to Syria, the envoy Cneius Octavius, not only to pronounce a severe reproof against the regent, but also to destroy his magnificent troop of elephants and to burn his fleet. The orders were carried out without opposition; but Octavius met with his death, at the hand of an assassin, in a bath at Laodicea. But the authorities in Rome were on that account secretly displeased with the court of Antiochus, and purposely overlooked the rebellion of Demetrius. When this prince appeared as an invader in Syria, he gained over the people and the army to his cause and had the king and the regent murdered (162). The discontented Judaean party made use of this change in their rulers to lodge their complaints against the Hasmoneans. They were led by a priest of the name of Jakim, or in Greek Alcimus, the nephew of one of the teachers of the Law, Jose son of Joezer, but he adhered to the party of the innovators. Alcimus and his ad­herents, embittered at having been excluded from the Temple and the altar—as was said, with a golden key—repaired to the king of Syria, to whom they gave a gloomy picture of the state of Judaea, ascribing the misfortunes of the country to Judas and his followers. The point of the accusation was leveled against Maccabaeus. As long as he lived, they said, the land would never attain the blessings of peace. This accusation was pleasing to Demetrius, as it gave him an opportunity of asserting his power over a small semi-independent province. But he did not walk in the footsteps of his kinsman, Antiochus Epiphanes, as regarded religious persecution. However, the fact of his being able to name Alcimus high priest and political leader to the Judaean commonwealth, would be a sign that he was master of the people. In order to prevent any opposition to his wishes, he sent Bacchides, a rude, inexorable warrior, with a large troop of Syrians, to Jerusalem. But Judas and his brethren were not deceived by the peaceful advances of the commander. Convinced that their freedom and their lives were at stake, they quitted their beloved city, and retreated to the mountains.

The unsuspicious Chassidim allowed themselves, notwithstanding, to be deceived, and trusted Alcimus, because he was of the house of Aaron. A large assembly of distinguished scribes, possibly the whole body of the Sanhedrin, repaired to Bacchides and Alcimus, assuring them of their friendliness and devotion, and begging of them to promote the peace and welfare of their country. Alcimus, the new high priest, solemnly swore that this was his intention; but as soon as he had taken possession of the city, he ordered sixty of the Chassidim to be slain, his uncle Jose being probably one of the victims. This act of perjury and bloodshed spread terror and mourning through the whole country. Again all hearts turned towards the Maccabees, and many of those who had joined the faction of Alcimus left him and sought the Hasmonean brothers at Modin.

It hardly required a new outrage, perpetrated by Bacchides to light the torch of civil war. The Syrian army had intercepted the march of a number of Judaeans, who were leaving Alcimus In a body, had surrounded them near Jerusalem, at Beth Zachariah, and after slaying them, had thrown their dead bodies into a cistern. All who loved their freedom and their country, now gathered round the Hasmonaeans. But Alcimus succeeded in attracting the ambitious, luxurious and indifferent Judaeans, who transgressed the Law. The nation was once more divided into two rival factions. At first the Hellenists were the stronger, as they were under the protection of foreign troops. Alcimus lost no time in marching through the land, in order to force the inhabitants to pay submission to Demetrius and obedience to himself as high priest. Meanwhile the army of the Maccabees was growing in strength and numbers. Judas was once more able to take the field against the Hellenists, and to punish the deserters, and he spread such terror that the adherents of Alcimus did not dare to show themselves outside Jerusalem.

Alcimus placed his hopes of ultimate success in the devotion he showed to the Syrian Court, more than in his popularity among the people. Therefore he hurried to Antioch with fresh accusations against the Hasmonaeans. But Demetrius was not alarmed at the rebellion of his Judaean subjects. He sent Nicanor, one of the warriors who had escaped with him from Rome, to Judaea, commanding him to deal severely with the insurgents. This leader, too, considered it necessary to proceed gently at first, until the troops placed at his disposal had arrived. He gave out that having heard of the valor and heroism of the great Judaean commander, he was anxious to become personally acquainted with him; and that to effect a reconciliation between Judas and the king, he would send three confidential envoys to confer with Maccabaeus. Posidonius, Beodotus, and Mattathias, were, it was said, acceptable to Judas and his adherents, and an interview consequently took place between him and Nicanor.

The latter was so enchanted with the Judean hero, that he advised him after the conclusion of the peace to take a wife and bring an heroic race into the world. It is said that Alcimus put an end to this good understanding by informing the king that Nicanor was playing a false part, that he favored his enemy Judas, and contemplated raising him to the office of high priest. Hereupon the king sent strict orders to Nicanor to cease all negotiations, and to send Judas in chains to Antioch.

Meanwhile Judas, who had been cautioned not to trust Nicanor, had retreated to his mountain fastnesses, whither he was followed by Nicanor and his army. A battle ensued at Capharsalama, on the confines of Samaria, where Nicanor’s army suffered defeat, and was driven back to the fortress of the Acra. Enraged at this repulse, the Syrian renewed hostilities with untiring energy, his chief object being to make Judas prisoner.

He repaired to the Mount of the Sanctuary, there to make known his orders that the hero should be delivered up to him. In vain did the Council come forth to meet him, assuring him of their devotion to the king, for whose welfare they offered up daily sacrifices; he treated them all with rough contempt, and swore that he would burn the Temple down, if Judas were not delivered into his hands.

In order to induce the Judeans to surrender him, Nicanor ordered that the most respected man in Jerusalem, Ragesh, or Razis, called by general consent “Father of the Judeans”, should be seized and kept as a hostage, but it was said that Ragesh committed suicide upon the approach of his intended gaoler. Nicanor was now determined to vanquish the Maccabees. He marched out from Jerusalem at the head of an immense army, pitching his camp at Bethoron, whilst Judas, surrounded by 3,000 of his bravest followers, took up his post at Adarsa. Judean valour was once more triumphant over the superior numbers of the Syrians. Nicanor fell on the battlefield, and his army fled in utter confusion. The inhabitants of the towns and villages poured forth in pursuit of the fugitive Syrians, and cut off their retreat to Gazara, so that not a single man reached that town. The battle of Adarsa (160) was of so decisive a character that its anniversary was celebrated in years to come under the name of the day of Nicanor. The head and one of the arms of the Syrian commander had been severed from the body, and were hung as trophies on the walls of Jerusalem. Judas and the Hasmoneans were once more masters of Jerusalem, since Alcimus had withdrawn himself even before the battle.

Judas, aware of the insecurity of his position, and believing that Demetrius would avenge the destruction of a part of his army, took a step of doubtful wisdom—that of making overtures to the all-powerful state of Rome. He entrusted two of his countrymen with the important mission— Eupolemus, the son of Jochanan, of priestly family, and Jason, the son of Eleazer. They were both proficient in the Greek tongue. But hardly had they reached the end of their journey before Judas was obliged once more to draw his sword.

Demetrius, upon hearing of Nicanor’s defeat, had sent an immense army, commanded by the merciless Bacchides, to Judaea. This general marched through Galilee, killed all the Judeans whom he met on his way, and in the springtime of the year encamped before Jerusalem. Judas had again been obliged to leave the capital, because, stripped as she was of her walls, she afforded no shelter. He issued a proclamation to the men and youths of Judaea to come forward and fight for their fatherland, their Law, and their freedom, but only 3,000 responded to the call. Led by Judas, these troops marched south, encamping near Eleasa, because the mountains the north were no longer safe. Bacchides followed the Judaean army with 20,000 foot and 2,000 mounted soldiers, taking up his position at Birat, near Bethlehem. Confronted with this vast host the Judean warriors lost heart. They declined to give battle for the moment, but insisted upon dispersing to await fresh reinforcements. In vain did Judas employ all his eloquence to urge steadfastness upon them. The greater number deserted, leaving only eight hundred men to support Judas. Selecting the most valiant of this little band, he successfully attacked the right wing of Bacchides, and drove the enemy to the confines of Ashdod. But the small troop of Judean soldiers left behind was net able to withstand the desperate onslaught of the Syrian army, and when Judas returned from the pursuit he was obliged to devote all his energy to the deliverance of his followers. He and his band of picked men performed wonders of bravery. There were wounded and dying on both sides, and the battle lasted from morning till evening. But the Judean army became smaller and smaller, until it was entirely surrounded by the enemy. At last even Judas Maccabeus fell like a hero, sword in hand. The rest of the soldiers fled from the battlefield, and the Maccabean brothers, under cover of the general confusion, were able to save the body of their heroic commander from the contempt or ill-usage of the enemy.

The defeat at Eleasa or Birat (160) seemed to have rendered useless all the previous Jewish victories. The lion-hearted troop of Hasmonaeans were dispersed, Alcimus once more took possession of the Temple and the Holy City, and was therefore able to triumph over his antagonists.

But the long-years of Maccabean warfare had not been in vain. They had roused the people from their torpor, and had given them a second youth. The blood of martyrs is said to heal wounds. In truth all old wounds were healed by this willing sacrifice of so many lives. From without, the shame that appeared to taint the Judaean nation had vanished. The contemptuous Greeks, who had felt the force of Judas’ arm, no longer derided the Judaean people, and the Judaeans were no longer required to prove their equality with the Greeks by joining in the Olympian games. From within, the Judaeans had learnt to know themselves and their mission; they proved themselves to be God’s people, destined to guard His law and His teaching, and capable of defending those precious gifts. Entire self-sacrifice, taught by the prophet Elijah to a few disciples, and preached by the second Isaiah in fiery eloquence, had become, through the action of the Maccabean warriors and martyrs, the recognized duty of the whole nation.

Judas Maccabaeus had breathed out his heroic soul on the battlefield of Eleasa. The whole nation mourned for him, and justly, for it had become orphaned by his loss.

The sublime enthusiasm that had led to the valiant deeds of the Maccabees, that had moved singers to extol the Lord “in new songs” could not be of lasting duration. It was the result of exalted spiritual condition, and, in the natural course of things, would give way to a corresponding state of indifference. An entire nation could not continue in arms from year’s end to year’s end. Besides which, the principal cause which had prompted a warlike rising had ceased to exist. For it was no longer demanded of them to deny the God of Israel, or to sacrifice to Jupiter. One of the conditions of the truce that Judas Maccabaeus had concluded with the young king Antiochus Eupator, or with his general or regent Lysias, was the religious freedom of the Judaeans. Demetrius I did not interfere with this concession.

In the Temple at Jerusalem, the sacrifices were offered up according to law, and although the high priest, Jakim or Alcimus, was not a favorite of the people, yet unlike his predecessor Menelaus, he came of priestly descent. But the party of the Hellenists still held the fortress Acra in Jerusalem, whence they menaced the faithful with the destruction of their city, and the violation of their Temple. The conqueror, Bacchides, after the death of Judas, had made them masters of the land, and they were resolved to misuse their authority in order to bring about the downfall of the pious Judaeans.

Actions that would have roused noble natures to active measures did not seem important enough to warrant the short-sighted, and above all things, ease-loving people to take any decided steps against their enemy and to hazard their own safety and that of their belongings, unless a voice of authority called upon them to act.

But after the death of Judas Maccabaeus there was no one who could claim absolute authority.

Although the Hasmonaean brothers were beloved by the people, they had not the power of summoning the whole nation to their standard, and they were only looked upon as a party.

INTERNAL CONFLICTS. 

In fact, after the death of Judas there were three distinct parties amongst the people, and this party spirit was a symptom of the reviving character of the Maccabaean wars. First, there were the pious Chassidim, or Assidaeans as they are more generally called, whose very existence depended upon the essence of Judaism. Then came their persistent antagonists, the Hellenists, amongst whose members were the servants of the Temple, the priests, the old and distinguished family of the Odura, and the sons of Phasiron. Lastly, the Hasmonaeans, who had raised themselves to great power in a short time and whose leaders were the three remaining sons of Mattathias, Jonathan, Simeon and Jochanan. The Hasmonaeans resembled the Assidaeans in their love for Judaism and the Sanctuary, but they differed from them, in their wider perception, in their greater knowledge of outward circumstances, in their manly energy, which could not be deterred from its purpose by any adverse circumstances. They were not content with having prevented the violation of the Sanctuary, or with having obtained the recognition of their religious rites; but they longed to rid themselves of the causes productive of misfortune to their country. A Psalmist describes them most accurately in these words: “The praise of God is in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hands”. They could not bear to contemplate the Judaeans under the hateful yoke of the Greeks, or to know that Judaism depended for its very existence upon the whim of a Syrian despot, or the intrigues of a treacherous party. Not only did Judaea require religious freedom, but also political independence. But the Hasmonaeans feared that they lacked the strength to found an independent Judaean commonwealth. Thus they determined to rely upon extraneous aid, and for this purpose they desired to connect themselves with the Roman state, and it appears also with the Parthians, who had freed themselves from Syrian rule. But it was this worldly policy that incensed the Assidaeans. They put their trust in God alone, and could only imagine warfare conducted according to biblical precedent; they believed that God would confound the enemy in a miraculous way, and considered that to seek foreign help was synonymous with want of confidence in God. “It is better to trust in the Lord than in man”, they quoted, “it is better to trust in the Lord than in princes”. This disunion between the two parties had possibly been instrumental in separating the Assidaeans from the Hasmonaeans, thereby reducing the number of the Maccabaean warriors, a circumstance which may have helped to contribute to the fall of Judas. Of the three parties, the Hasmonaeans alone had a chance of being ultimately the leaders of the nation. The Hellenists had destroyed their prospects by breaking too entirely with the observances or prejudices of the people, whilst the views of the Assidaeans were of an intensely narrow character, and they were too fond of their own undisturbed repose to infringe it by seeking a remedy for the state of anarchy in which Judaea was plunged.

Confusion was indeed rampant at that time. Whenever Hellenists and Hasmonaeans met, a disgraceful conflict was the result; no voice of authority forbade such practices, there was hardly a court of justice, where a plaintiff could demand redress. Famine did but increase this miserable state of things.

We are told by one of our most trustworthy historians, “that there was great sorrow in Israel at that time, greater than there had been at the close of the prophetic age”.

In their anguish the unfortunate people turned to Jonathan Chaphus, hoping that he would humiliate the Hellenists and restore peace to the country. But Jonathan did not possess the warlike energy of his brother Judas, nor was he supported by the whole nation. He was more of a politician than a general. Too weak to attack the army that Bacchides had quartered in Judaea, he was merely able to take measures of defence. Threatened by the Syrian host, the Hasmonaeans entrenched themselves in the woodland country on the shores of the Jordan; but, fearful of an overpowering attack, they prepared to send their wives and children across the river to the friendly Nabataeans. On the way, however, this peaceful troop was suddenly attacked by a warlike tribe, that of Bene Amri from the city of Madaba, and with their leader Jochanan, the Hasmonaeans were put to the sword—a deed of infamy that was subsequently avenged by Jonathan.

But even in their hiding-places, in the valley of the Jordan, the Hasmonaeans found no rest. Bacchides sought them out, attacked them on the sabbath day, when they were not exactly forbidden to defend themselves but when they were less prepared for resistance, and forced them to swim the river and find safety on the opposite side. The whole country was now at the mercy of the enemy. Bacchides restored the fortresses, regarrisoned the strong places, the Acra, Bethzur and Gazara, storing them with provisions and with weapons. He assured himself against the treachery of the people by seizing upon the children of the most distinguished families and placing them as hostages in the Acra. Thus, in the space of one year (160-159) Bacchides succeeded in entirely putting down all armed opposition to the Syrian rule, a feat that not one of the previous Syrian commanders had been able to accomplish in six years.

DEATH OF ALCIMUS.

The hero of the Maccabees was sorely missed. Had King Demetrius wished to make any important changes in the religious condition of the Judaeans he could not have chosen a more opportune moment; the strength of the people was broken, and their leaders were banished from the scene of action. But the successor of Antiochus Epiphanes, sunk in a life of debauchery, was content with having assured himself of the sovereignty of Judaea, and of the annual payment of the tribute money. The Syrian court, even after the death of Alcimus, troubled itself but little, if at all, about the religion of the Judaeans. Although he was disliked by the people, the high priest Alcimus did not belong to the extreme Hellenists. He was merely an ambitious man who always worshipped the rising power. The offence with which he was reproached appears, on closer examination, hardly to have beer a sin aimed against the religion of the Judaeans. It appears that between the inner and outer courts of the Temple was a kind of screen, named, on account of its fragility, “Soreg”. This screen, the work of the prophets, as it was called, was used as a boundary, which no heathen, no unclean objects of any sort or kind might pass to penetrate into the Temple. But Alcimus gave orders for the destruction of this partition, probably with the intention of admitting the heathen within the sacred precincts. The pious Judaeans were justly incensed, and when Alcimus was seized, directly after this command, with paralysis of speech and of body, from which he never recovered, they attributed his fatal illness to Heaven’s wrath.

After the death of Alcimus the Syrian court left the office of high priest unfilled, evidently with the intention of destroying even this semblance of Independence on the part of the Judaeans. For seven years the Temple had no high priest, and the country no political head. Probably the priestly functions were carried on by a substitute for the high priest, under the name of Sagan. We hear nothing more of Syrian hostilities. Bacchides left the country, and Judaea was at peace for two years (159-157).

Jonathan and Simon, the leaders of the Hasmonaeans, made use of this peace to strengthen themselves and to arm their followers. They were entrenched in the fortress Bethagla, in an oasis of the desert of Jericho, within the grateful shade of a wood and near a stream of running water. The river Jordan protected their rear.

In preparing for war Jonathan had no other purpose than that of many a Bedouin chieftain, to infringe upon the peace concluded by the governors of the land; but as the sympathy of the people went with him, and as he carried his sword in a holy cause, his voice soon gained authority. Without doubt the harm he did to the Hellenists was considerable, for we hear of their carrying fresh complaints to the Syrian court. But as Demetrius was hopelessly indifferent, and as Bacchides was weary of undertaking a guerilla warfare at great disadvantage to himself, they remained inactive, whilst the Hellenists proposed to fall treacherously upon Jonathan and Simon, and to deliver them as prisoners to the Syrians. An ambush was laid for the two commanders, but the conspiracy was revealed, and the Maccabees were able to take measures of defence upon this occasion. Fifty Hellenists were seized and executed. Bacchides, who had counted upon a rapid conclusion to the conspiracy, felt himself entrapped into a new war, and proceeded to besiege the Hasmonaeans in their fortress of Bethagla. But the Judaean army had grown to so large a force that it was possible to divide the troops. Thus Jonathan and his followers defeated the Hellenists, who supported Bacchides in the open field, whilst Simon with his division succeeded in burning the siege machines of the enemy. Hampered on both sides, and with a considerable loss of soldiers, Bacchides was forced to raise the siege of Bethagla, and as an outlet for his rage executed several of the Hellenists in his army. This was an appropriate moment for Jonathan to demand and obtain a truce. The condition agreed upon was that Jonathan should return to Judaea unmolested, but that he should not be permitted to inhabit Jerusalem. Hostages were demanded as a pledge of his word, and prisoners were exchanged. Bacchides then marched out of the land, leaving his allies, the Hellenists, unprotected.

Jonathan took up his position in the fortress of Michmash, where Saul had once fixed his head­quarters. He was now the acknowledged head of the Judaean people, and showed a firm front to its enemies. The terror of his name was a guarantee of peace. For five years “the sword no longer reigned in Israel”. How this state of things would have finally ended is difficult to say, but it is certain that without the aid of an unexpected piece of good fortune the dream of the Hasmonaeans could never have been realized.

A revolution in the Syrian kingdom effected a complete change in the fate of Judaea. It became imperative to invest Jonathan with supreme power.

ALEXANDER BALAS.

An obscure youth of Smyrna, Alexander Balas, was the cause of this revolution. He happened to bear an extraordinary likeness to the late king of Syria, Antiochus Eupator. This similarity of feature prompted Attalus, king of Pergamum, to induce Alexander to play the part of pretender to the throne. Alexander, richly supplied by Attalus with money and troops, was recognized by the Roman senate as heir to the kingdom of Syria. Demetrius, now rudely awaked from his day­dreams, began to look about him for allies. Above all he was anxious to gain Jonathan to his side. This led him to write a flattering epistle to the Hasmonaean commander, calling him brother-in­arms, and entreating him to collect his forces and to procure weapons. The Judaean hostages were at once to be set free.

Jonathan did not neglect so favorable an opportunity. He hurried to Jerusalem, repaired the walls and fortified the city. The Hellenists sought refuge in the fortress of Bethzur. But Alexander, who was also in want of help was equally eager to enlist Jonathan in his cause, and knew how to make him look most favorably upon his claims. He nominated Jonathan high priest, sent him a robe of crimson and crown of gold, thus declaring him tributary prince of the Syrian kingdom and friend of its monarch.

Jonathan donned his priestly garment and officiated for the first time as high priest in the Temple upon the Feast of Tabernacles (152); he was the first of the Hasmonaeans who had gained so great a distinction and who was able to hold it for any length of time.

Thus Judaea, brought to the very brink of total destruction by a war of twenty years, was saved at last, by the valor and self-sacrifice of a handful of warriors. The sufferer’s part which she had had to play for so long was now to be exchanged for that of an active and heroic one.

Jonathan greatly contributed to the growing power of the nation during his rule (152-144). He justly divined which side he should espouse in the struggle for the Syrian crown. He allied himself to Alexander, although Demetrius, like all who have nothing left to lose, was profuse in the most liberal offers. Ignoring the high priest, this monarch wrote direct to the Judaean people, promising to free them from their imposts, to return three provinces to their jurisdiction that had once been added to Samaria, to recognize Jerusalem as a sanctuary and even to give up the important Acra. He declared that he would defray the means for conducting divine service in the Temple out of his own royal treasury, reserving for that purpose the revenues of the town of Ptolemais, still in the hands of his opponents. The Judaean army was to be raised at Syrian cost, all preferments and rewards given according to Syrian custom, and the forces consisting of 30,000 men, were naturally to serve as his allies. Even the Judaeans, settled in the Syrian provinces, were, out of consideration for this alliance, to be secure from all foreign interference, and were to be exempt on all sabbaths and festivals and for three days before and after the festivals from being called before any court of justice.

JONATHAN AND TRYPHON.

But nothing could bribe the Judaean people to separate themselves from Jonathan; they were not blinded by these brilliant prospects, and their leader was too well acquainted with the character of Demetrius, to give heed to his promises. Thus he allied himself with Alexander, aided him in crushing his rival and never had cause to regret the step that he had taken. The usurper loaded Jonathan with marks of favor, and gave great prominence to the fact that the friendship of the Maccabaean chieftain had materially helped him to the Syrian throne. When he entered the city of Ptolemais, to receive the daughter of the Egyptian monarch, Ptolemy VI Philopator, as his bride, he invited Jonathan to meet him, and the two kings entertained the Judaean warrior as their equal.

During the reign of Alexander Balas (152-146) Judaea revived from the cruel wounds that despotism and treachery had dealt her, and was soon able to call 10,000 men into the field. Jonathan on his side treated Alexander with unalterable loyalty. For when Demetrius II, the son of Demetrius I, contested, as rightful heir to the throne, the sovereignty of Syria, Jonathan upheld Alexander’s cause most strenuously, although that monarch was deserted by Egypt and Rome.

The Maccabaean chieftain began by opposing the advance of Demetrius’ general Apollonius on the shores of the Mediterranean. He besieged and took the fortress in the sea-port town of Joppa, destroyed the old Philistine city of Ashdod, that had declared itself for Apollonius, and burnt the Temple of the god Dagon. As a reward for his services, Jonathan received from Alexander the city of Ekron, with the surrounding country, which from that time was incorporated with Judaea (147).

The Syrian people were now divided in their allegiance, some of them acknowledging the usurper Alexander, and others the rightful king Demetrius II, but Alexander was at length treacherously slain. In the general confusion resulting from these events, when a part of the nation, and the army went over to Demetrius II and a part remained true to Alexander, the house of Jonathan was able to besiege the Acra, the strong­hold of the Hellenists.

The besieged turned for help to the Syrian king, and Demetrius II, eager to overthrow the powerful Maccabaean, listened to their appeal, marched to their rescue, and commanded Jonathan to meet him at Ptolemais. But when Jonathan obeyed and came with rich presents, Demetrius thought that his alliance might be of use to himself, and not only did he abandon his march upon the Acra but he confirmed Jonathan in his priestly office.

Jonathan, well aware that the king was in sore need of money, offered him 300 talents in exchange for a few districts of land and for the promise of the exemption of the Judaeans from all taxation. The compact was made, written, and placed for security hi the Temple; but Demetrius, in spite of his solemn protestation, soon regretted having freed the Judaeans from their imposts. No Syrian monarch was ever known to be loyal to his word or to refrain from recalling favors granted in some pressing moment of danger. The Judaean army meanwhile was soon to enjoy the unexpected triumph of inflicting the same degradation upon the Syrian capital that the Syrians had so often inflicted upon Jerusalem. Demetrius had excited the discontent of his people to such a degree that they actually besieged him in his own palace at Antioch, and his troops, who were clamoring for pay, refused to aid in his deliverance. Thus he felt himself in the unpleasant position of being compelled to seek the help of Jonathan’s Judaean troops. The 3,000 men sent by the high priest destroyed a portion of the Syrian capital by fire, and forced the inhabitants and the rebellious soldiers to release their king and sue for pardon. But no sooner was Demetrius at liberty than he treated his deliverer with the basest in gratitude. Jonathan, therefore, refused to come to his rescue, when a general of Alexander Balas, Diodotus Tryphon by name, conspired against him, attempting to place Antiochus VI, the young son of Alexander Balas, on the throne of Syria. Demetrius was forced to fly from his capital. Embittered at the faithlessness of the Syrian monarch, and grateful to the memory of Alexander, Jonathan espoused the cause of the young king and his regent Tryphon. The latter confirmed him in his priestly office, and permitted him to wear the gold clasp, the insignia of an independent prince. Simon, his brother, was made commander of the Syrian forces on the shores of the Mediterranean, from the ladder of Tyre to the Egyptian confines.

DEATH OF JONATHAN.

Bravely did the Hasmonaean brothers fight for Antiochus, upon the triumph of whose cause the freedom of the Judaeans depended. Victory and defeat succeeded one another alternately; but at last the Hasmonaeans besieged and took several towns, and finally entered Damascus. They drove the Hellenists out of Bethzur and regarrisoned that fortress. Beyond all things they were determined to make Jerusalem impregnable. They rebuilt her walls, extending them eastwards to the vale of Kidron, thus creating a defence for the Holy Mount; they erected a fortress in the middle of the city, facing the Acra, thus cutting off the Hellenists’ means of communication with the country, and they filled up the moat “Chaphenatha”, which divided the Holy Mount from the city, and which was but partially bridged over, and thus brought the Temple, as it were, closer to the town.

But Jonathan would not attempt the siege of the Acra, partly because he might have given umbrage to his allies, the Syrians, and partly because he did not dare to concentrate all his forces at one point, for the generals of the fallen Demetrius still gave signs of resistance. At that time Judaea could boast of an army 40,000 strong (144-143).

Subsequent events proved plainly enough that the prudence evinced by the Hasmonaeans at the outset of this campaign was not exaggerated. As soon as the treacherous general, Diodotus Tryphon, felt himself secure of the Syrian army he determined to overthrow the puppet king Antiochus, and to place the crown upon his own head. But the greatest hindrance to the attainment of these ends was Jonathan himself, who, true to the memory of Alexander, was the devoted champion of the rights of Antiochus, and who, moreover, was in possession of a great part of the sea coast. Tryphon was well aware that Jonathan would not become a party to his treachery, so he determined to rid himself of the high priest, and thus weaken the followers of the young king. But a course of open violence being impossible he resorted to craft, and actually succeeded in outwitting the most cunning of all the Hasmonaeans. Upon the news of Tryphon having entered Scythopolis at the head of a powerful army Jonathan hurried to oppose him with 40,000 picked warriors. To his amazement he was most courteously received by the Syrian commander, and loaded with presents. Entirely duped by so flattering a reception, he was persuaded by Tryphon to dismiss the greater number of his troops and to follow his host into the seaport city of Acco (Ptolemais), a fortress that Tryphon promised should ultimately belong to Judaea. Of the 3,000 soldiers remaining with Jonathan 2,000 were now sent to Galilee, 1,000 alone following their chief. But hardly had they passed the gates of the fortress before Jonathan was seized and made prisoner by the treacherous Tryphon, whilst the Syrian garrison fell upon his men and massacred them.

After the accomplishment of this infamous deed the troops rushed out in pursuit of the Judaean soldiers, who were stationed in the plains of Israel and Galilee. But the Judaeans had already heard of the fate that had befallen their brethren, and they turned and gave battle to the Syrians, putting them to flight. With the report of Jonathan’s death they entered Jerusalem, and great was the consternation of their sorrow-stricken brethren. They believed that their beloved Jonathan had fallen, like his thousand followers at Acco, a victim to the faithless commander. A new Syrian yoke seemed impending with its usual terrible results, and the Hellenists, they surmised, had been instrumental to their misfortunes. There was, in reality, a secret understanding between Tryphon and the remnant of the Hellenists; the Syrian commander helping these rebellious and unpatriotic Judaeans from without, whilst the latter were ready with their aid from within should the Judaean capital be besieged. But Simon Tharsi, the last of the Hasmonaeans, was happily to avert this twofold danger. In spite of his great age he was a man of such lofty enthusiasm and such singular heroism that he was able to rouse the people from despair to hope. When he exclaimed to the multitude assembled in the outer court of the Temple: “I am no better than my brothers who died for what they held most sacred”, the Judaeans replied with one voice: “Be our leader, like Judas and Jonathan, your brothers”. Placed at the head of the nation by the people themselves, Simon was determined to secure Jerusalem from a treacherous stroke on the part of the enemy, either from without or from within her walls.

He sent a Judaean contingent under the leadership of Jonathan ben Absalom to Joppa, in order to prevent the landing of the Syrian army, whilst he assembled his forces at Adida.

Tryphon, accompanied by his prisoner Jonathan, had already passed out of Acco with the Intention of falling upon Judaea, which country he imagined would have been paralyzed by his act of treachery. He was determined, moreover, to intimidate the Judaeans into subjection by threatening to assassinate their high priest. But upon hearing, to his amazement, that all Judaea was in arms, and that Simon was the leader of the people, he began cunningly to enter into communication with the enemy. He pretended only to have made Jonathan prisoner for the purpose of securing one hundred talents of tribute money which the Judaeans used formerly to pay to Syria, and promised that if this indemnity were forthcoming, and Jonathan’s two sons were delivered up as hostages, he would release his prisoner. Simon was in no way deceived by this artifice of Tryphon, but trembling to incur the reproach of having caused his brother’s death, he paid the tribute money and delivered up the hostages. Tryphon, however, had no intention of making peace with the Judaeans: on the contrary, he was at that very moment taking a circuitous road to Jerusalem, not daring to run the risk of meeting the Judaean forces in the open. He might safely have reached the capital had not a heavy snow­fall, most unusual in those hot climates, made the mountain roads of Judaea impassable, and forced him into the trans-Jordanic country.

Engaged at this defeat of his plans, he caused Jonathan to be executed at Bascama (143). The remains of the great Maccabaean high priest and commander were ultimately recovered, and buried by Simon and the whole people at Modin, in the burial ground of the Hasmonaeans. Thus ended the fourth of the Hasmonaean brothers; he achieved more than his predecessors had done, and more than his successors could do; for he raised the Judaean republic from the very lowest depths to an eminence whence she could hardly rise higher. It is true that Judas Maccabaeus had performed more numerous deeds of valor, and had gained a more brilliant military renown than Jonathan, but the younger brother had given his people power and importance, and by virtue of his priestly office had conferred lasting distinction upon his family.

After the death of Judas, the Judaean nation was as great as she had been in the days of the sanguinary Antiochian persecutions; but after Jonathan’s death, the first principles of a real State were recognized in her—a foundation for much that was to come.

If we may compare Judas Maccabaeus to the Judges of the Biblical age, then we may liken Jonathan to King Saul, who attempted to steer in troubled waters, and who in his own person made an era in the history of his time. As Saul united the dispersed tribes, and molded them into a powerful people, so did Jonathan, by his priestly crown, unite the divided factions, and make them a strong and independent nation. Neither did the death of King Saul, nor that of the High Priest Jonathan, although both were deeply mourned by the people, necessarily put an end to the nation’s unity, because in neither of these parallel cases did the unity of Judaea depend upon one individual, but upon the consciousness of the nation. As Saul found a worthy successor in his son-in-law David, so did Jonathan in his brother Simon.

Of Jonathan’s descendants, only one daughter is mentioned. She was married to Matthatias ben Simon Psallus, and was the ancestress of the historian Flavius Josephus. At the same era in which the Judaean State was growing and developing out of political trials, Judaean teaching on another platform, was asserting an independence, by which in time it was to influence the civilization of the whole world. The political growth of Judaism was being matured in Judaea, the intellectual or spiritual growth in Egypt.