had acquired a large sum of money, and he was certainly devoted in heart at least to the party of the free. While Simon was making a circuit to investigate the condition of the country districts, Ptolemæus enticed him, with his sons Mattathias and Judas, into the little fortress of Dôk' which he had himself built near Jericho. There he murdered him at a banquet in the February of 135 B.C. His next step was to secure from the king in all haste his confirmation in office as the successor of Simon. Thus it fell out that the fortune of the David of this age was not in the end by any means so good as that of his great predecessor.

III. JOHN HYRCANUS, GRANDSON OF MATTATHIAS, 135-106.

1. His Conquests. The Books of Judith and Enoch.

In Johanan, however, or John, surnamed Hyrcanus,2 Simon left behind him a successor already well tried, who was not unlike in wisdom to a Solomon of this later day, and who was besides inferior to none of the previous Asmonean heroes in military capacity and true ambition for his people. It is always in the power of the unspoiled young scion of a new house, when he is aided by an age that aspires after better things, to cope successfully with the grave defects and perversities which still survive from the previous period; and the question is, how far did the grandson of Mattathias, who came to power under such unusual circumstances, succeed in perfecting the work of his fathers? His rule, which lasted about thirty years, certainly displays on the whole the further fruits of the independence and higher tranquillity which naturally sprang from the baptism of blood of more than forty years' duration in the profound sufferings and labours of the Maccabean period, and, viewed from without, it is marked almost exclusively by splendour and triumph. Yet the impossibility of improving a hagiocracy from its foundations is only made all the more clear at the end of the long and valiant

Called Aayor in Jos. Bell. Jud. i. 2, 3; Ant. xiii. 8, 1; the view of De Sauley, Voyage, ii. pp. 139–145, about Kâkûn can scarcely be established.

2 The surname Hyrcanus appeared at an earlier date, p. 272; cf. 2 Macc. iii. 11, in a powerful family at Jerusalem; but it was certainly not ennobled by any one in the same way as by Johanan. Its origin is unquestionably to be looked for in

the reference to those Judeans who had continued to reside in Hyrcania (since the exile), and among whom there might still be many persons of eminence. The confusions and dreams in Ben-Gorion, iv. 2, and Mace. Arab. xx., deserve no attention. Cf. also p. 309 note 1.

3 The great labours of the five brothers are often, and with justice, referred to in 1 Macc.; for instance, in x. 15, xiii. 3.

rule of this prince. Unfortunately we lose sight again here of the older sources of pure narrative,' and are limited to the statements of Josephus about the outward events of the history of the people; and till the beginning of the Herodian age these are very unsatisfactory. But from this time a rich stream of other sources, a good deal scattered, it is true, and easily confused, is opened up. The particulars which we can now recover, are as follows.

1) The beginning of John's rule was full of difficulty. The murderer of Simon had not only thrown himself at the feet of the king; he had also made his two elder sons prisoners, had sent men to Gazara to assassinate John, and had attempted to win over all the principal officers, and, by means of his servants, to seize Jerusalem. John, however, warned in time, himself slew the murderers engaged for his own death, hastily took possession of the high-priesthood and of Jerusalem, and advanced against the fortress to besiege the delinquent. The siege dragged on a long while, for whenever John showed any serious design of making an assault, the wretch, it was said, stood on the wall and threatened to torture and put to death his mother and two brothers imprisoned within, and John, in spite of the contrary signs of his heroic parent, then desisted from the attack. At length Ptolemæus executed his captives, after all, and fled across the Jordan to Zeno, the governor of Philadelphia (the ancient Rabbath-Ammon), as in the impending sabbatical year 3 all his resources were exhausted through the dearness of provisions. Not long after, however, Antiochus of Sidê marched to besiege Jerusalem, laying waste the country far and wide. This king, the best and bravest of all the later

The history of John of course existed formerly, properly described in Greek books, for which the high-priestly records mentioned in 1 Macc. xvi. 23 sq. were employed. This Greek book which Sixtus Senensis (Biblioth. Sancta, 1575, p. 37) declares that he once saw in Lyons, and which according to his description bore a great resemblance to the first book of Maccabees, perished there soon after by fire. That Josephus made any use of it is hardly probable, for his description of the numerous actions and events of John's rule is only very inadequate, and never distinguishes the dates. On the other hand, this era forms the commencement of the work De Bello Judarco, of which a new edition was published at Marburg in 1864, begun by C. F. Weber, and completed by Julius Cæsar. It has been incorrectly ascribed to Hegesippus, but

pretends to be nothing more than a Christian reproduction of Josephus. As is stated in the preface, it begins at this point, as its author (whom we may assume to have been the famous Ambrose of Milan) wished to supply a continuation of the history from the date at which the first book of Maccabees, which he acknowledged as sacred, terminated. But the work shows no acquaintance with any authorities except the books of Josephus.

2 Jos. Bell. Jud. i. 2, 4; Ant. xiii. 8, 1. According to 1 Mace. xvi. 16-22, the two sons were killed along with Simon; yet the narrative has perhaps only taken this form in consequence of the brevity of the conclusion.

3 Jos. Ant. xiii. 8, 1. The statement permits of a closer calculation with the sabbatical year already mentioned, p. 31 ^, which fell twenty-eight years earlier.

Syrian monarchs, was very persistent in his enterprises, in spite of a certain lofty gentleness and goodness of general disposition. Before the winter set in he invested the city closely with double intrenchments, and erected a hundred siege towers on the north side. This investment, which continued to the following autumn,' added to the severe sufferings consequent on want of supplies, reduced the city to the utmost distress. But the steadfastness and indomitable spirit of the besieged triumphed at last. As the autumn festival drew nigh, John made overtures to the king for an eight days' truce. Antiochus met his request so heartily, adding on his own part rich sacrificial gifts, that negotiations for peace naturally sprang up between the two princes. Antiochus demanded a specific tribute from Joppa and the other towns which did not belong to Judea in the narrower meaning of the name, and the admission of a garrison into Jerusalem. In place of the latter condition, John offered to give hostages, and among them his own brother, together with five hundred silver talents. With this proposal the king was satisfied: but he had the walls of Jerusalem demolished. It was evidently the closer acquaintance with the peculiar qualities of the people who would make any sacrifice for their religion which opened the eyes of the most active and keen-sighted of all the later Seleucidæ; and, in the first flush of joy at their deliverance, the people showed a true feeling in naming this prince Antiochus Eusebes, i.e. the Pious, in contrast to his predecessor Epiphanes. John, however, sought relief in his financial difficulties by opening the tomb of David.3 The treasures which he found there enabled him not only to pay the required redemption money, but also to enlist foreign mercenaries, as experience had already proved that it was difficult to control internal hostilities and restore princely power in Israel without the nucleus of a standing army devoted solely to its service. Thus, in spite of the hagio

This may be inferred, at least, from the scattered data in Jos. Ant. xiii. 8, 2. Contrary to expectation, the city was in no want of water, as there was a plentiful fall of rain towards the setting of the seven stars.'

That they were carefully restored by John, as soon as circumstances allowed, certainly after 130 B.C., is not, it is true, stated by Josephus (whose narrative is for the most part much too brief, and probably passes over many particulars intentionally); but it is impossible to imagine anything else, and the fact is confirmed by

the brief allusion to the acts of John in 1 Macc. xvi. 23. Cf. on this point Diodorus, Hist., in the epitome, xxxiv. 1, and Porphyry in the fragments collected by C. Müller, Fragm. Hist. Græc. iii. p. 712 sq. Porphyry's statement that the king put the noblest of the Judeans to death probably refers to something passed over by Josephus; and it 18 remarkable that the Syrians gave the designation Eusebes to another and later Antiochus.

Vol. iii. p. 228 note 1.

cracy, the age of David and Solomon was now destined thus far to reappear. John himself, however, immediately accompanied the king as his vassal to the war, the progress of which was at first successful.

2

But about the years 130-1281 the bitter news reached Jerusalem of the disastrous issue of the Parthian campaign. Antiochus had been killed; the mad and hated Demetrius II. had escaped from his Parthian captivity, was again on the throne in Syria, and was carrying on new wars right down to Pelusium. This intelligence naturally created great anxiety for a time in Jerusalem. The claims of the Seleucide to supremacy in Jerusalem had never yet been given up, and after its brief term of greater freedom under Simon the country had completely relapsed into an oppressive state of vassalage to Syria. Moreover, there was certainly no lack of persons who shared the disposition of Simon's son-in-law, and, after the violent contests which had recently taken place, a certain flagging of the efforts and energies of the people had unmistakably set in. But as even in a period of oppression one indefatigable and valiant leader easily quickens the bolder spirits of the people at large to a higher flight, so at this time, while for the moment there was nothing to be done requiring a special exertion, it became again the active function of literature to excite and elevate the national mind.

2) That the book of Judith appeared when the hosts of Demetrius II. were overthrowing everything along the coast as far as Egypt, may be assumed as certain. It was rather the object of this book to excite passion and revenge from below against the national enemy, who was again threatening them so violently. Other writings, however, arose at the same time, with an opposite and a higher tone. Composed from the prophetic standpoint as continuations of the book of Daniel, it was their aim to work upon the race by an influence shed down as from the pure heights of heaven; and they exhibit in fact the ultimate development of simple prophetic literature still possible in this latest age. They are the productions which have come down to us collected by a final redactor into the book of Enoch. This book was first discovered in modern times in an Ethiopic version, and belongs, as we can discern

The only description of John's career which we now possess is given by Josephus, and it contains no chronological particulars about separate years.

See the only too brief epitomes in

Justin, Hist. xxxix. 1, and in Porphyry; and also the work of the Syrian Posidonius in the abstracts in Athenæus, Deipnos. x. 53, xii. 56; also Joh. Ant. in Müller's Fragm. Hist. Græc. iv. p. 561.

with confidence, to this particular period.' The last redactor collected into this book no less than three books of Enoch, which came out one after another by different authors, and a book of Noah, which was produced later still. It is the third of these books which gives us the clearest insight into the historical moment of its appearance. For though, like the book of Daniel,2 and all similar apocalyptic works, this book only indicates the period for which it was immediately composed by certain signs addressed to the attentive reader, it is not possible on further consideration and with more adequate historical knowledge to remain any longer in doubt upon the point. Israel had long been feeling itself lost, as it were, beneath the power of heathen kings, still waiting in vain for the Messiah. In this connection a special significance was attached, as we haye seen,3 to the number seventy; and accordingly the book exhibits a long series of seventy heathen sovereigns as the rulers under whose sway God had placed his people since the days of David, Solomon, and Elijah, in consequence of their growing defection from him and from his word. This was, in fact, a way of treating the centuries which had elapsed since the new Jerusalem had been more or less in constant subjection to the heathen. Of these seventy, however, the twelve last had been worse than all their predecessors. Standing nearest to the actual present, they were necessarily the best known and the easiest to enumerate. We may, therefore, take this number in the strict historical sense. The interval between Antiochus the Great, who was the first of the Seleucida who ruled in the holy land, and the second reign of Demetrius II., after the death of Antiochus Sidêtes, includes twelve Seleucida." These princes could with perfect

5

At the time of the first edition of this volume [in German] we possessed no accurate edition and translation of the Ethiopic book. I therefore limited myself here simply to a somewhat closer determination of its age, passing over the question of the division of the work and its different authors. About the same time, however, I wrote a longer essay, Ueber das Zeitalter des B. Henokh, which appeared in the June number of the Kieler Allgem. Monatsschrift, 1852. Soon after appeared the Ethiopic edition, translation, and interpretation of the book by Dillmann; upon which I gave a further explanation of many points in the essay, Ueber des B. Henokh entstehung sinn und zusammensezung, Gott., 1854. On the barren productions of later critics, and on other questions, see the Jahrbb. der Bibl. Wiss.

Pp. 74. 252.

According to the principal passage, cap. lxxxviii. sq. of the old numeration. The most proper division of these two chapters would be before lxxxviii. 110.

According to lxxxix. 25 (xc. 17 Dillm). 61) Antiochus the Great; 2) Seleucus Philopator; 3) Heliodorus, see p. 292 sq., who though only on the throne for a short time could still be reckoned with the kings; 4) Antiochus Epiphanes; 5) Antiochus Eupator; 6) Demetrius I.; 7) Alexander Balas; 8) Demetrius II.; 9)