On the other hand, we gather from the general tenor of the history that those who favored Hellenism were in the majority in Judea during the times immediately preceding the Maccabean outbreak. Not only were the Jews compelled from the needs of commerce to acquaint themselves with the Greek language, but it is also evident that the attempts to introduce Greek customs into Judea met with considerable success. If then there had been no violent means used to this end, and things had been permitted to go smoothly on in Judea, as had been the case in Syria and in Egypt, it seems humanly speaking probable that as in the latter cases, so in the former, the Judaism of Palestine would have taken a more or less Hellenistic form. “For it belonged to the very essence of Hellenism that it should dominate and color the modes of religions worship, and at least clothe them in Grecian garments. We find it so in Syria as well as in Egypt”.
But although, as far as numbers go, those who favored Greek ways seem to have been in the ascendant in Judea, the check was sudden and effective. The violent attempt of Antiochus Epiphanes to "rush" (in modern phrase) his policy and abolish Judaism at one blow, aroused the spirit which found expression in the Maccabean revolt. “It was just the extreme and radical character of the attempt that saved Judaism. For now not only the strict party of Chasidim, but the whole mass of the people, was roused to do battle for the old faith. And the further development of events led to the complete expulsion of Hellenism from Jewish soil, at least in matters of religion. So far as our information reaches, this is the only example of an Oriental religion completely emancipating itself from the influence of Hellenism”. It is true that the need in pre-Maccabean days of resisting the seduction of Greek manners had already done something in this direction. None the less did the savagery of Epiphanes bring about the saving crisis of Judaism.
The contemplation, however, of the Maccabean revolt from this point of view must not cause us to forget that its leaders were in constant intercourse with Greeks. Although in one sense those leaders were fiercely Semitic and national in their aims, they were willing to deal in the way of treaties with the Seleucid kings or the Roman Senate, and, as Prof. Mahaffy observes, in a case of the latter kind (circ. 129 BC) “the very names of the ambassadors — Simon, son of Dositheus; Apollonius, son of Alexander; and Diodorus, son of Jason, cultivated men, who doubtless spoke Greek perfectly at Rome—show the worldly side of John Hyrcanus”.
We have spoken of the barbarities practiced upon the Jews by order of Antiochus Epiphanes, and the martyrdoms which were the outcome of Jewish heroism. The Assideans and those whom by preaching and example they encouraged to resistance, took refuge, as their forefathers had done, in caves and other hiding-places. At first the Assideans would not permit their followers to defend their positions if assailed on the Sabbath, and we are told that on one such occasion Philip, the Phrygian commander of the Syrian forces, was able to destroy vast numbers of the fugitives by applying fire to the caves in which they had sought refuge.
Hope at last appeared, and the heroism of Mattathias and his family supplied the leadership which was needed by the afflicted nation. He belonged to the priestly family of the Hasmoneans, so called from Chasmon, his great-grandfather. He was an old man, and his sons were all in their prime. He had withdrawn from Jerusalem, when the state of affairs rendered it impossible for him to discharge his priestly functions there, to Modin, his home. The emissaries of the king, in the course of their expeditions for the purpose of extirpating Jewish rites, arrived at Modin, and urged Mattathias to sacrifice to Jupiter, promising advancement, if he would comply. When he stoutly refused, on behalf of himself and his family, to forsake the law of his fathers, even should he stand alone in resistance, he saw a Jew step forward to comply with the commissioners’ demand. This spark kindled the flame. With his own hand he slew his recreant fellow-countryman, while his sons killed Apelles, the leader, and his soldiers, and destroyed the altar of sacrifice. Thereupon Mattathias summoned all to follow him to the mountains, where he carried on for a year a successful warfare, harassing the enemy, and careful not to meet them in the open, as long as his forces were still untrained to cope with anything like disciplined troops. He persuaded even the more rigid of his followers to give up their scruples as to self-defence on the Sabbath. His adherents constantly increased, and although, as in the times of the Judges and early in the reign of Saul, they had to live for the most part in hiding-places, they gradually gained experience in warfare, as well as courage from the successes gained in unlooked-for descents upon towns occupied by the enemy, where he slew foes and apostates alike, circumcised the children, and destroyed symbols of idolatry.
In 167 BC, feeling death approaching, he committed the cause to his five sons, exhorting them to be faithful to the charge thus laid on them. Each of them had a distinguishing epithet. John was Gaddis, “the Holy”: Simon, Thassi, “Guide”; Judas, Maccabeus, “the Hammer”;Eleazar, Avaran, “the Beastslayer”; Jonathan, Apphus, “the Cunning”. John, as the eldest, was head of the family, but their father, knowing their natural aptitudes, named Simon as the adviser, and Judas the leader in war. The selection was justified by events. Judas showed himself possessed of ability, patriotism, modesty, tactical skill, unfailing courage, and military ardor, and won undying fame among heroes. “He was renowned unto the utmost part of the earth, and he gathered together such as were ready to perish”, is the enthusiastic summing up of his merits by the native historian of his times.
After a while spent in completing the training and organization of his men by the same tactics as had been adopted by his father, he soon succeeded in defeating and slaying Apollonius, the commander of the Syrian detachment, and set an example of turning the enemy’s arms upon himself, by ever after using the sword which he had thus captured. Not long-subsequently, in the pass of Beth-horon, encouraged no doubt by the memory of Joshua's overthrow of the five kings of the Amorites, he completely routed the army of Coele-Syria under Seron.
Antiochus, roused to indignation by these unexpected defeats, and prevented from avenging them in person by the need of suppressing insurrections against his authority in Parthia and Armenia, entrusted an army of mercenaries to Lysias, his son’s guardian. His policy towards the Jews was now changed. Hitherto he had sought to Hellenize them by planting colonists, who should induce them to give up all their distinctive features as a nation, and become absorbed into the Greek world. But now his end was to be obtained, not by absorption, but by annihilation, and his orders were that the Jews should be exterminated, and the land colonized by external troops.
Lysias for this service chose three generals, Ptolemy, Nicanor, and Gorgias, with a force variously estimated at twenty thousand and at forty thousand soldiers. His troops were so confident of success that they were accompanied by Phoenician slave-traders, with chains and money ready for the acquisition of the captives on whom they reckoned, and whose price they had already fixed. They proceeded by the coast route to Emmaus (now Amwas), twenty-two Roman miles N.W. of Jerusalem, near the Jaffa road. Judas took up his quarters in the first instance at Mizpah, where in old time, when the nation was in sore need, Samuel had procured for them a victory decisive and with lasting results. Having inspired his followers with enthusiasm by the display of a scroll of the Law, for the maintenance of whose precepts they were about to fight, he led his forces, 6,000 in number, to a position on the south of Emmaus, and thence into the hills. Gorgias, leaving part of the Syrian army in charge of Nicanor, who was commander-in-chief, proceeded by night to the hills to attack Judas's camp. Forewarned of this plan, Judas had withdrawn his men, and, descending under cover of darkness to the plain, appeared at Emmaus, and attacked and destroyed his enemy's position with great slaughter. Gorgias, when day dawned, perceived the camp in flames, and, not venturing to hazard a conflict with the foe thus flushed with success, withdrew to the Philistine country. The booty, including much gold and silver, proved of considerable value in facilitating the continuance of the struggle. “And they returned hom
e, and sang a song of thanksgiving, and gave praise unto heaven; because His mercy is good, because His mercy endureth for ever”.
This took place in 166 BC In the following year Lysias resumed hostilities, this time leading in person a large army of horse and foot along a circuitous route by way of Idumea. He met with no better success, being completely overthrown at Beth-zur, a town which commands the main road from Beer-sheba and Hebron to Jerusalem, and which played an important part in the Maccabean struggle.
These signal successes put a completely new face upon the Jewish resistance, and a lull in the contest with their oppressors having now set in, Judas proceeded to Jerusalem, where the citadel was still held by Menelaus under the protection of Syrian forces. The deserted sanctuary, idolatrous altars, and images of Zeus and of Antiochus would remind the Jewish leader that much yet remained to be done. The Temple was now thoroughly cleansed of its pollutions. A new altar and new vessels were provided, while a wall with two towers was erected as a defence against attacks from the citadel. We gather that Hellenizing priests were rigidly excluded from taking part in the restoration of the national religion, and doubtless Menelaus, though still titular high priest, had no share in the proceedings. On the removal of the polluted altar, a council of elders determined to place its stones in one of the porches of the entrance court, “until there should come a prophet to show what should be done with them” (1 Mace. 5. 40). In order that the fire for the new sacrifice might come from a source of unquestioned purity, it was obtained by striking stones together. Just three years to the day from the defilement of the altar of burnt-offering by idolatrous sacrifice, the consecration was effected. It was ordained that each year the festival commemorative of this rededication should be held for eight days “with gladness and joy” (1 Mace. 4. 59). Its name to this day is Chanukah (Consecration) or the Feast of Lights, the latter symbolizing the reestablishment of the Divine illumination of the Law.
The freedom from active service in the field was, as might be expected, but temporary. The Jews’ inveterate enemies, Idumeans and the rest, were as hostile as ever. Judas fortified Beth-zur, and rescued and brought to Judea many of his countrymen who were suffering ill treatment at the hands of their heathen neighbors in Galilee and Gilead or among the Ammonites andEdomites.
Lysias meanwhile, probably from lack of money wherewith to pay mercenaries, left Judea to itself. Antiochus failed in his Parthian expedition, and on his return died in Taba, a Persian city, appointing his relative Philip guardian of his son Antiochus V (Eupator). This appointment of a rival to Lysias (who already held the same office) had the natural result of giving the final blow to the strength of the Seleucid kingdom. Judas ventured under these circumstances to lay vigorous siege to the citadel. Probably through the collusion of Hellenistic priests, whom he had excluded from participation in his restoration of worship, those who held the fortress, McNeal’s included, made their escape to Antioch, and urged that strong measures should be taken by the king. Lysias, with his youthful charge, accordingly laid siege to Beth-zur, which was the key of that part of the country. The Sabbatical year (163 BC), in which there could be neither sowing nor reaping, increased their difficulties, and the garrison was reduced to surrender. Thereupon Judas went out to meet the Syrian troops at Beth-zachariah (between Jerusalem and Beth-zur), but his force, a mere handful by comparison, in spite of prodigies of valor was driven back to Jerusalem, and took refuge in the Temple precincts. Even these would have been carried by assault, had not the advance of Lysias’s rival Philip upon Antioch compelled the former to make terms with the Jews and withdraw. In the treaty thus obtained they secured a promise of complete religious freedom, and although, in spite of the terms of peace, the fortifications of the city were razed to the ground, the people had at least gained through their leader the main object for which they had for years been contending. Henceforward accordingly we may observe that the char¬acter of the contest was altered. None of the successors of Epiphanes attempted to overturn the Jewish religion by force. The struggle was henceforward primarily within the nation, between the stricter and the Hellenizing parties, the one or the other of them calling in the Syrian power to their aid. Atpresent the national party were in possession. But presently Demetrius (Soter), son of Seleucus IV (Philopator), and thus nephew of Epiphanes, made his escape from Rome, slew his cousin Antiochus Eupator and Lysias, and with the support of the Romans assumed the kingdom of Syria (162 BC). Menelaus had been put to death by Lysias, and Alcimus (or Jakim) named by Demetrius as his successor. The new high priest, with other leaders of the Hellenist party at Jerusalem, urged upon Demetrius that he should relieve them from what they represented as the oppression of Judas Maccabeus. In reply to their request, Bacchides was sent as general to carry out their demands. Alcimus, as a lineal descendant of Aaron, as well as by the assurances which he gave, had secured the support of the Assidean party, who, however, were taught by his treacherous murder of sixty of their number that their allegiance was misplaced. This and a further outrage on the part of the Syrian general Bacchides had the effect of strengthening anew the party of Judas.Alcimus sought additional help from Demetrius, who, in reply, sent Nicanor with a com¬mission to take strong measures against the rebels. After a conference with Judas, and complimentary speeches on the part of Nicanor, there followed a battle at Capharsalama, and another at Adasa, in both of which the Syrian forces were utterly routed. On the latter occasion Nicanor himself fell.
Judas now, fearing the vengeance of Demetrius, sent an embassy to the Roman Senate, who readily tendered their support, in pursuance of their general policy to extend their influence by taking up the cause of one of the parties to a dispute, and so acquiring a footing from which to advance their own interests. In this case their policy was doubtless influenced by their desire to adopt measures at once easy and effective to keep up control over the power to which, in the days of Epiphanes, they had administered so peremptory a cheek by the hand of Popilius Laenas. Their order to Demetrius in pursuance of this treaty, that he should no longer trouble the Jews, came too late. Only about two months after the death of Nicanor, Bacchides, despatched to Judea, inflicted a crushing defeat at Elasa upon Judas, who himself fell in the engagement, and was buried by permission of the victors with his father at Modin.
After all, it is not to be wondered at that even such a hero was unable to maintain his ground permanently against a foe so overwhelmingly superior in numbers. His earlier victories, surprising as they were, may be accounted for in part at least by his powers in strategy. Never afterwards were the Jews successful against their foes, except when the Syrians were themselves weakened by internal dissension.
FROM THE DEATH OF JUDAS TO THE DEATH OF SIMON III. (160—135 BC)
GREAT as was the blank left by the death of the chief leader among the Maccabean brothers, yet the condition in which he left his countrymen was at any rate to be preferred to that from which he had rescued them. Now, as we have said, there was no longer a question of their being compelled to conform to idolatrous customs. Further, they had gained a knowledge of what they could do in the way of resistance to a foreign foe. Self-respect and self-reliance had been to some extent impressed upon them by the victories which Judas had gained by a rare combination of skill, courage, and enthusiastic confidence in his cause as being that of God.
Internal dissensions were however rife, and there was no longer a sufficiently commanding personality to overcome any of the evils of faction. The Assideans, the Hellenists, and the adherents of the three surviving brothers of the Hasmonean family, divided the nation. The first-named, narrow in their sympathies, had no very definite views of policy, except to give a general support to the high priest Alcimus; holding that his Aaronic descent sufficiently counterbalanced his treachery towards them and his undoubtedly Syrian sympathies. The Hasmoneans looked to the treaty which Rome, on the principle of obtaining a hold on the weaker of the two contending powers, had made with Judas Maccabeus.
The Hel
lenists continued their former aims; they still held the citadel at Jerusalem, where they proved a thorn in the side of their fellow-countrymen.
The sufferings of famine were now added to intestine troubles, and it was evident that only by the efforts of the Hasmonean party could any brighter future be looked for. Jonathan, the present leader, was more of a politician than a general. His brother Jochanan was slain in an attack by a hostile tribe, and Bacchides in the course of a year practically reduced the country to submission to the Syrian yoke. Alcimus, who, apparently with the object of giving the heathen access to the Temple, had ordered the destruction of a line of demarcation which stood between the inner and outer courts, was seized with paralysis and died, owing, as the stricter Jews believed, to the wrath of heaven at his sacrilegious purpose.
For some years (150—153 BC) the Jews were without a high priest, and Bacchides for the first two of them left the country to itself, a circumstance of which Jonathan made good use by seeking to improve his position for taking the offensive. This endeavor of his so far succeeded, that, after a certain amount of strife with both Hellenists and Syrian forces, the land had rest for five years.
But more striking success was now in store, of a character that shows the powerful position which the Maccabean leader had succeeded in acquiring. The Hellenizers evidently failed to command the sympathies of any large number of the people. The Assideans doubtless were in general accord with the party of Jonathan, and the people over whom he presided at the end of those years of respite had a real claim to be regarded as a united nation. The war of faction had been put down.
Jonathan’s supremacy was conceded, and so apparent to Syria that the rivals for power were eager to secure his support.
The Age of the Maccabees (Illustrated) Page 4