History of the Jews (Vol. 1-6). Graetz Heinrich

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ deny the God of Israel, or to sacrifice to Jupiter. One of the terms of the truce that Judas Maccabæus had concluded with the young king Antiochus Eupator, or with his general-guardian Lysias, was the religious freedom of the Judæans. 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 favourite of the people, yet, unlike his predecessor Menelaus, he came of priestly descent.

      It is true, 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 use their authority in order to bring about the downfall of the pious Judæans. But such proceedings, well as they may be adapted to rouse noble natures to active measures, do not seem important enough to warrant a short-sighted, and, above all things, peace-loving people to take any decided steps against their enemy, and to hazard their own safety and that of their families, unless a voice of authority calls upon them to act.

      But after the death of Judas Maccabæus there was no one left to claim such authority.

      Although the Hasmonæan brothers were beloved by the people, they had not the power to summon the whole nation to their standard, and they were looked upon only as leaders of a faction.

      In fact, after the death of Judas one could discern the beginnings of three distinct parties amongst the people; party spirit, always a symptom of national vitality, had, as far as Judæa was concerned, its origin in the Maccabæan wars. First, there were the pious Chasidim, or Assidæans, as they are more generally called. These obeyed not only the Law, but the additional enactments promulgated by Ezra and the Supreme Council. Then came their persistent antagonists, the Hellenists, who, in violent contrast to the former, scorned the earnest Judæan life, and sought to introduce Greek customs. These were despised of the people, who called them "Traitors to the Covenant." In spite of this they numbered among their adherents Temple officials, priests, and the old and distinguished family of Odura, and the sons of Phasiron. Lastly, there were the Hasmonæans, who had raised themselves to great power in a short time, and whose leaders were the three remaining sons of Mattathias, Jonathan, Simeon and Johanan. The Hasmonæans resembled the Assidæans in their love for Judaism and the Sanctuary, but they differed from them in their wider view, in their practical judgment, and in their manly energy, which could not be deterred from its purpose by any adverse circumstances. They were not content with having averted the violation of the Sanctuary, or with having obtained the recognition of their religious liberty; but they longed to rid themselves of the causes which had brought misfortune on 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 have the Judæans remain 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. They were not content with mere religious freedom; they wished to establish political independence. But the Hasmonæans feared that they lacked the strength to effect this purpose. They therefore determined to rely upon extraneous aid, and for this purpose they desired to connect themselves with the Roman government and, it appears, also with the Parthians, who had freed themselves from Syrian rule. But it was this worldly policy that incensed the Assidæans. They put their trust in God alone, and could imagine warfare possible only if conducted according to Biblical precedent; they believed that God would confound the enemy in a miraculous way, and, in their opinion, to seek foreign help was to cast a doubt upon the omnipotence of God. "It is better to trust in the Lord than to confide in man," they quoted, "it is better to trust in the Lord than to confide in princes." This discontent, it may be surmised, was the cause of the separation of the Assidæans from the Hasmonæans, thereby reducing the number of the Maccabæan warriors. This circumstance may have brought about the death of Judas.

      Of these three parties, the Hasmonæans alone had a chance of being ultimately the leaders of the nation. The Hellenists had destroyed their prospects by disregarding entirely the observances or prejudices of the people; whilst the Assidæans entertained views of an intensely narrow character, and were too fond of repose to disturb it by seeking to remedy the state of anarchy in which Judæa was plunged.

      Confusion was indeed rampant at that time. Wherever Hellenists and Hasmonæans met, a disgraceful conflict was the result; no voice of authority forbade such practices; there was not even a court of justice. Famine did but aggravate this miserable state of things. "There was great affliction in Israel, the like whereof had not been seen since a prophet had been among them."

      In their anguish the unfortunate people turned to Jonathan Haphus, 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 Judæa, he was merely able to take measures of defence. Threatened by the Syrian host, the Hasmonæans entrenched themselves in the woodland country on the shores of the Jordan; but, conscious of their weakness, they sent their wives and children to join the friendly Nabatæans. 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, the Hasmonæan Johanan, was 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 Hasmonæans found no rest. Bacchides sought them out, attacked them on the Sabbath-day, when indeed they were not forbidden to defend themselves, but when they were too much hampered by legal minutiæ to join battle with full force, and compelled 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, reinforced the strong places, the Acra, Bethzur and Gazara, storing them with provisions and weapons. He enforced the loyalty of the people by seizing 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 which the previous Syrian commanders had not been able to accomplish in six years.

      The strong arm of the Maccabæan hero was sorely missed. Had King Demetrius wished to make any important changes in the religious condition of the Judæans, 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 over Judæa, 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 Judæans. Although disliked by the people, the high-priest Alcimus had not belonged to the extreme Hellenists. He was merely an ambitious man who always worshipped the rising power. An offence with which he was reproached appears, on careful examination, hardly to have been a sin against the religion of the Judæans. It appears that between the inner and outer courts of the Temple there was a sort of wooden screen, of lattice-work, called "Soreg." This screen, the work of the prophets, as it was called, was the boundary, beyond which no heathen, nor any one who had become unclean by contact with a corpse might pass. But Alcimus gave orders for the destruction of this partition, probably with the intention of admitting the heathen within the sacred precincts. The pious Judæans were so highly incensed at this, that when Alcimus was seized, directly after this command, with paralysis of speech and of limbs, from which he never recovered, they attributed his fatal illness to the wrath of Heaven.

      After the death of Alcimus, the Syrian court left the office of high-priest unfilled, evidently with the intention of removing even this semblance of Judæan independence. 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 of further Syrian interference. Bacchides left the country, and Judæa was at peace for two years (159–157).

      Jonathan СКАЧАТЬ