Chapter Five The Reign of Herod and the Herodian Dynasty

The persecution by Antiochus and the Maccabean revolt led to the spiritual and material independence of the Jewish nation both in Judaea and outside. The Jewish monotheistic faith was saved, with momentous results for the world. In the second century before the current era, after centuries of subjection to imperial powers, an independent Jewish state had arisen under the leadership of the Hasmonaeans, and gradually expanding over the whole of Palestine, had achieved international recognition and status. Palestine became religiously and nationally 'Greater Judaea', and this fact set its stamp on the religious, cultural and ethnic character of the country for a long period. The existence of the Hasmonaean state was further accompanied by a vigorous religious development and by a strength• ening of Judaism in the countries of the Diaspora. When Rome gained control of the whole of Syria, Judaea entered the sphere of Roman influence and rule. Pompey's capture of Jerusalem in 63 B.C.E. ended the episode of Jewish independence. The settlement concluded by the Roman commander separated various areas from the state of Judaea and abolished the Hasmonaean monarchy. But neither Pompey nor his immediate successors reversed the wheel of history completely. The large Hellenistic cities, it is true, were freed from Jewish rule; but the greater part of Idumaea, Galilee and important sections of the maritime strip (Sharon) remained Jewish. Hyrcanus II, the chief representative of the Hasmonaean house and the lawful inheritor and ruler of Judaea, was appointed ethnarch of the country, simultaneously holding the high priesthood in accordance with the Jewish tradition still in vigour in the Second Temple period, whereby the high priest was also the political head of the state of Judaea. One of Pompey's successors, Gabinius, governor of Syria in the years 57-55 B.C.E., attempted to break up the unity of the Jewish population by partitioning it into five sanhedrins; but the serious rebellions which broke out in J udaea in the fifties proved to the Roman authorities that it was better to give more power to the native rulers, subject to Rome. These were the conclusions drawn, in the main, by Julius

216 HEROD AND THE HERODIAN DYNASTY

Caesar, who reunited the Jewish population, restored the port of Joppa to J udaea, granted permission to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, and increased the prestige of the high priest and ethnarch, Hyrcanus II. The death of Julius Caesar (44 B.C.E.) again threw Judaea into the vortex of the Roman civil wars. The Jewish population suffered fiscal oppression and the enslavement of many of its members. Hyrcanus still retained his position as high priest and ethnarch, and was favoured by successive Roman governments, but in the entourage of Hyrcanus and of the branch of the Hasmonaean family dependent upon him, another family began to come to the fore, one which had been in partnership with Hyrcanus from the beginning -the house of Antipater the Idumaean. Antipater and his sons skilfully enhanced their power and influence throughout the changes and vicissitudes of Roman rule. Under Julius Caesar, Antipater's son Phasael had served as governor of Jerusalem, and another son, Herod, had simul• _taneously ruled Galilee. After the deaths of Caesar and Antipater, while Rome's eastern provinces were in the sphere of influence of Cassius and Brutus, the killers of Caesar, Antipater's sons maintained their dominant position, even overshadowing in great measure Hyrca• nus II, the official ruler of Judaea. Hyrcanus' granddaugther Mariam• me also became betrothed to Herod. These developments aroused the hostility of the majority of the Jewish people, who saw that the Hasmonaean dynasty was being supplanted by a foreign house, only half-Jewish, while they themselves were becoming completely subject to Roman power.

The struggle between Herod and Antigonus A new situation arose for the opponents of the Antipatrids and for the Jews in general after the defeat of Cassius and Brutus by Antony and Octavian at the battle of Philippi (42 B.C.E.). Since both the Anti• patrids and, officially, Hyrcanus had been among the supporters of Cassius, their opponents expected to gain a sympathetic hearing from the triumvir Mark Antony, who had been made responsible for the affairs of the East. The group opposing the Antipatrids was divided. Some wished to have them deposed in order to strengthen Hyrcanus' government. Others aimed at replacing Hyrcanus by Antigonus, the younger son of Aristobulus II, the Hasmonaean king who had been deposed by Pompey. Among the various delegations which surrounded Antony when he reached Bithynia, there was a Jewish deputation which accused Phasael and Herod of being in fact usurpers,

2IJ