The Oxford History of the Biblical World

by Coogan, Michael D.

  Population figures have also played a role in attempts to answer this question. According to some, the Jewish population increased so dramatically in the Hellenistic period that no explanation other than successful missionary activity can explain it. But in the view of others, the increases cited are within what could be expected given what is known of life span, mortality rates, and similar factors in the ancient world. In fact, there is as much uncertainty on just this point as there is in trying to arrive at reasonable estimates of population for a given area.

  Still, throughout the Hellenistic period a number of writers commented on the Jews—some favorably, some unfavorably, and still others in a mixed vein, all influenced by a variety of cultural and social factors and by their source of information. A few of those who wrote or who read these words formed an attachment, formal or otherwise, to Judaism. Unfortunately, the hostile words and characterizations were more often preserved, and they influenced later generations to think and act antagonistically toward the descendants of the Hellenistic Jews we have been discussing.

  Conclusion

  We began this chapter by articulating the view that the Hellenistic world is a difficult but rewarding period to write about. Many of its primary characters, both historical and Active, passionately embraced the positions they held and invested their actions with universal, if not cosmic, significance. The very future of the Jewish people, of the Jewish state, of the Jewish god seemed to be at stake. When viewing such events centuries later, it is perhaps wisest to be as dispassionate as possible, recognizing that subjectivity neither can nor should be entirely eliminated. Is it not best to remain neutral?

  And yet we feel impelled to state our position. A creative and mutually beneficial synthesis between Judaism and Hellenism was not only desirable, but possible; not only possible, but attainable; not only attainable, but attained. Much of the Jewish-Greek literature we have examined, both that originally composed in Greek and that translated from a Semitic language into Greek, achieved a high level of cultural, artistic, and aesthetic synthesis. The same is true in the realm of architecture. This was not the old-time religion of previous eras, but neither was it a diluted form of the tradition.

  With these thoughts in mind, we may look at one other biblical book from the Hellenistic period, Qoheleth, or Ecclesiastes. Its very name is an enigma, but it apparently refers to an individual who calls others together in solemn assembly. In the first chapter the author is identified as David’s son, whom we understand to be Solomon. The entire linguistic and literary structure of the work makes it clear that it originated not in the tenth century BCE, in the days of the United Monarchy, but in the Hellenistic age. The author of Ecclesiastes did not intend to confuse anyone with this designation; rather, he was emphasizing the role of tradition in this most untraditional book. Through its chapters almost every mainstay of tradition seems to be rejected: the very value of life, not to mention ritual and social norms, is questioned, weighed, and found wanting. Everything is transitory, and death is seen as part of the problem and not the solution. This author shows an openness to all sorts of concepts, images, and experiences. At the same time, he evinces little desire to reconcile the contradictions that are part of his thinking and most likely of his life.

  In many ways, “Ecclesiastes” speaks for the Hellenistic Jew, who seeks to synthesize the variety of stimuli to which he has been exposed. At the same time, his readers are alerted that all Jews must go on their own quest. He recognizes that the end results of these quests will not be equally satisfying when strictly viewed from the norms of tradition. But he and his audience lived in an age when life’s largest questions had no single answer and tradition was only one of several authorities that could be appealed to. Go your own way, experience life fully, remember your roots, make God your master. This is the contradictory, but surprisingly appealing, advice Qoheleth imparts to his readers and to his fellow Jews with whom he shared the Hellenistic age.

  Select Bibliography

  Bickerman, Elias J. The Jews in the Greek Age. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962. A classic work by one of the acknowledged masters in Hellenistic studies.

  Cohen, Shaye J. D. From the Maccabees to the Mishnah. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987. An excellent account by a leading scholar in the field.

  Davies, W. D., and Louis Finkelstein, eds. The Cambridge History of Judaism. Vol. 2, The Hellenistic Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. This standard reference work contains impressive analyses and syntheses by a distinguished group of experts.

  Feldman, Louis H. Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World: Attitudes and Interactions from Alexander to Justinian. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1993. An impressive array of evidence dealing with non-Jewish attitudes toward Jews and the question of Jewish proselytism.

  Goldstein, Jonathan A. 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees. Anchor Bible, vols. 41 and 41A. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1976, 1983. These commentaries are essential reading for anyone interested in these books.

  Grabbe, Lester L. Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian: Sources, History, Synthesis. Vol. 1. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. The author of this recent study is judicious and perceptive in his analysis of primary documents.

  Gruen, Erich S. “Hellenism and Persecution: Antiochus IV and the Jews.” In Hellenistic History and Culture, ed. Peter Green, 238–74. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. An excellent summary and discussion of various proposals to explain Antiochus IV’s actions against the Jews.

  Hengel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter during the Early Hellenistic Period. Trans. John Bowden. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974. One of the most influential studies of the past three decades.

  Kraft, Robert A., and George W. E. Nickelsburg, eds. Early Judaism and Its Modern Interpreters. Adanta: Scholars Press, 1986. A collection in which experts discuss the status of research in their areas of specialization, with excellent bibliographies.

  Modrzejewski, Joseph M. The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian. Trans. Robert Cornman. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1994. An elegant discussion of Ptolemaic (Hellenistic) Egypt as the zenith of Jewish life in that land,

  Momigliano, Arnaldo. Essays on Ancient and Modern Judaism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. This posthumous publication contains several characteristically erudite and creative articles on Hellenistic Judaism.

  Nickelsburg, George W. E. Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981. In-depth analysis by an acknowledged expert.

  Peters, F. E. The Harvest of Hellenism: A History of the Near East from Alexander the Great to the Triumph of Christianity. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1970. A dependable historical survey of the Hellenistic period.

  Schiffman, Lawrence H. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of Judaism, the Background of Christianity, and the Lost Library of Qumran. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1994. A fine overview of the topic that emphasizes the Jewish context(s) of the scrolls and their authors.

  Tcherikover, Avigdor. Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1959. An influential study that is considered indispensable even by those who disagree with it.

  Wills, Lawrence M. The Jewish Novel in the Ancient World. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1995. A sustained treatment of Daniel, Tobit, Esther, and Judith as Jewish novels.

  CHAPTER TEN

  Visions of Kingdoms

  From Pompey to the First Jewish Revolt

  AMY-JILL LEVINE

  From the time they suppressed the revolts led by Sertorius in Spain and Spartacus in Italy in the 70s BCE to their defeat of King Mithradates VI of Pontus in 66 BCE, Roman forces under the capable leadership of Pompey increasingly consolidated their power over Europe and extended their control eastward to the Euphrates River. By 65, Pompey began to focus on Syria, and in 64 the former Seleucid empire became an imperial province. Since the region included
Judea and Galilee, the territory once ruled independently by the Hasmonean dynasty would soon come under Roman control, inaugurating a new chapter in the history of Israel.

  The Arrival of Roman Rule

  To some extent, the Romans’ assertion of control over Judea was the direct outcome of the empire’s expansionist policies, but strife within the Hasmonean family helped the Romans achieve their goals. At the end of the relatively peaceful reign of the widow of Alexander Janneus, Salome Alexandra (76–67), her son Aristobulus began to position himself for the throne. Aided not only by his father’s allies but also by some Sadducees whom the queen had removed from royal influence, he soon occupied twenty-two fortresses in Judea. This action aroused the concerns of his mother’s allies, the Pharisees, and of his older brother Hyrcanus II, the heir-apparent and high priest.

  After the death of their mother, Alexandra—whose Hebrew name Shalom-zion ironically means “the peace of Zion”—the brothers and their supporters fought near Jericho. Routed by Aristobulus and his Sadducean allies, Hyrcanus II fled to the Akra, the old Jerusalem citadel, and there he finally surrendered. In their treaty, Aristobulus received the throne and probably the high priesthood, and Hyrcanus retained his possessions and his income.

  This uneasy relationship did not remain untouched by outsiders. Antipater, the son of a rich Idumean who had been a governor under Alexander Janneus, attempted to return Hyrcanus to power and so increase his own. He convinced the passive Hyrcanus to make a treaty with Aretas III, the king of Nabatea (85–62). The pact guaranteed the Nabateans the return of lands taken by Janneus in return for support for Hyrcanus. Aretas defeated Aristobulus and attacked his troops, who had attempted to gain shelter in the Jerusalem Temple. At this point, both Aristobulus and Hyrcanus II sought help from Rome.

  Pompey, then campaigning in Asia Minor, turned his attention to the entreaties, and the bribes, offered by the warring brothers. In 63, Pompey came to Damascus, where he met with Aristobulus and Hyrcanus II. The royal entourages were not alone: the people of Judea also sent representatives, who requested that neither brother receive the throne but instead that Pompey replace the Hasmonean royal dynasty with rule by priests.

  Rather than make an immediate decision, Pompey deferred all requests until he could settle the Nabatean situation. Aristobulus, taking advantage of the delay, secured his forces in the fortress of Alexandrion. This military move did not please Pompey, who promptly invaded Judea. Aristobulus surrendered almost immediately, but his supporters, who took refuge in Jerusalem, did not. Pompey then attacked the city; there the ever-hopeful Hyrcanus opened the gates to Rome. After a three-month siege, the Temple held by Aristobulus’s allies fell to the Romans, and Pompey impiously entered the holy of holies, the innermost chamber of the Temple. There he found not an idol but an empty room.

  Thus the Hasmonean dynasty ended. All that remained of the Hasmonean lands were Judea, Galilee, Idumea, and Perea. Signifying their vassal status, these territories had to pay Roman tribute. Gone from Jewish governance were the coastal cities and all non-Jewish cities east of the Jordan. Pompey reestablished Hyrcanus as high priest, but without that office’s formerly substantial political power. Rome had no interest in promoting the Hasmoneans; the family’s nationalistic aspirations coupled with their dynastic difficulties had fully compromised their position. The only effective local power was held by that Idumean political opportunist Antipater, whose son would become known as Herod the Great.

  Pompey returned to Rome, bringing with him several hundred Judean prisoners, including Aristobulus. These slaves, and their freed descendants, contributed to the formation of the large Roman Jewish community, among whom the nascent Christian church would later find both support and enmity. The presence of Jews in Rome, and indeed throughout the Diaspora at this time, in turn contributed to the Hellenistic ethos that permeated formative Judaism.

  From the Negeb to Jerusalem and on to the borders of Galilee, Greek and Roman influences could be found. Although the vernacular remained Aramaic, and although most of the Dead Sea Scrolls are in Hebrew, many local people had some skill in Greek, increasingly the language not only of politics but also of trade. Greek inscriptions on coinage and monuments were common; two native authors, Justus of Tiberias and Josephus, both wrote in Greek, as did one of the principal sources for Josephus’s history of this period, Herod’s court historian Nicolaus of Damascus. And Greek-speaking soldiers and merchants became common figures. From the cache of manuscripts discovered at the Dead Sea come Greek fragments of the Hebrew Bible, suggesting that as early as the Herodian period some local Jews used a Greek version of the scriptures that they thought to be closer to the Hebrew than the Septuagint version used by Diaspora communities.

  Palestine under the Herods

  As for Pompey, in 60 BCE he formed, along with Julius Caesar and Crassus, the First Triumvirate. This political union was complemented by a personal one: Pompey’s wife was Caesar’s daughter, Julia. Following the death of Crassus and the several military triumphs of Caesar, eventually the coalition broke apart. Caesar crossed the Rubicon, civil war ensued, and Pompey, who had escaped to Egypt, was killed.

  Pompey’s actions in Jerusalem and his political fate in Rome and Egypt are described not only by the historians of the period but also by the Jewish poet who penned the Psalms of Solomon. This collection of eighteen poems, surviving in Greek and Syriac translations but probably originally written in Hebrew, testifies not only to the literary heritage of Israel but also to its hope for a savior and for the restoration of the land to the people of Israel. Psalms 18 and 19 speak of a new monarch in the image of King David, anticipating the increasing messianic fervor that would grip much of the first century CE.

  From the Hasmoneans to the Herodians

  After Pompey’s death in 48 BCE, Hyrcanus II and Antipater allied themselves with Julius Caesar, Pompey’s rival in the Second Civil War. For encouraging the Egyptian community to support Caesar’s campaign there, as well as for sending Jewish forces to Egypt, Hyrcanus was granted the title “ethnarch of the Jews,” which he added to his rank as high priest. The political title symbolized his role of representative of all Jews, both in Judea and throughout the Diaspora. Although Hyrcanus thus gained status, Antipater, appointed “procurator of Judea” by Caesar, retained the political power.

  Antipater engineered for his son Phasael the governorship of Jerusalem, and over Galilee he placed his younger son Herod. There Herod would face local popular as well as juridical opposition. In 47 he suppressed the guerrilla war being waged in the north by the local leader Hezekiah (Ezechias). Having executed the rebel after a mock trial, Herod was summoned by Hyrcanus to appear before the Sanhedrin to defend his actions. Yet he by no means capitulated; he arrived in royal purple, accompanied by an armed guard. Hyrcanus disbanded the session, perhaps on Roman orders, and expelled Herod from Jerusalem.

  Humiliated, Herod’s immediate impulse was to attack Jerusalem, but he was restrained by his calmer brother and father, who feared a potential civil war. Herod’s status was in fact enhanced following this confrontation with the Sanhedrin: Sextus Caesar, the Syrian governor, appointed him governor of Coele-Syria, and probably Samaria as well. In 43, Antipater was poisoned by his one-time ally Malichus, whom Herod then had assassinated.

  Ever dependent on the fortunes of the empire, both Herod and Judea found themselves caught in the web of Roman internal politics. In 42, Octavian, Mark Antony, and Lapidus defeated the old republicans Brutus and Cassius at the battle of Philippi in Thrace. Antony assumed responsibility for the eastern provinces. Within a year, two Jewish delegations complained at separate times to Antony about their local governors, Phasael and Herod. But Herod, who had been a supporter of Cassius, not only managed to neutralize the charges by appealing directly to Antony; he and his brother consolidated their positions when the new ruler, acting against the wishes of a substantial delegation of Jewish leaders, named them tetrarchs of Judea.

  Antony, Phasael,
and Herod were at least momentarily content; the general population of Judea was not. To the contrary, already opposed to Herod, they were now responsible for contributing to Antony’s lavish lifestyle. Taxes became more and more burdensome. The army too would demand increasing support.

  In 40 BCE the Parthians again took up arms against Syria and Judea. Among their allies was Antigonus, the son of Pompey’s captive Aristobulus II. Antigonus offered the Parthians support in exchange for their placing him on the throne in Judea. His campaign also received substantial backing from the Jewish population unhappy with Antipater’s sons. By the end of the campaign, the Parthians had captured Phasael and Hyrcanus II. Herod, the most politically astute of the local rulers, fled. To prevent Hyrcanus II from serving again as high priest, the Parthians mutilated his ears (see Lev. 21.17); Phasael committed suicide. The Parthians then honored their treaty and installed Antigonus as king in Judea.

  While the Parthians were hoisting the Hasmonean heir into power in Jerusalem, the Roman senate, with the support of Antony and Octavian, appointed Herod king of Judea. Herod then began his own military campaign. In 39 he took Galilee, Samaria, and Idumea; in 38 he received substantial help from the Roman general Ventidius, who defeated the Parthians and thereby cut off Antigonus’s military support. With the aid of Ventidius’s successor, Sosius, Herod gained the rest of the kingdom by the spring of 37. Antigonus was captured, taken to Antioch, and beheaded on Antony’s orders. Herod married Mariamme, the granddaughter of Hyrcanus II and the sister of Aristobulus III. He settled down to a reign of grandeur, economic and architectural expansion, and familial intrigue that lasted more than three decades (37–4 BCE).