“AFTER the death of Nehemiah, about B.C. 413, a thick curtain falls on the history of the Jews till the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes, B.C. 1752.” During upwards of 230 years, a period as long, to compare it with modern history, as from the death of Queen Elizabeth to the accession of Queen Victoria, the record of events is of the scantiest description. It appears certain, however, that Nehemiah was the last of the governors sent from the court of Persia. Judæa itself was annexed to the satrapy of Cœlesyria, and the administration of affairs was entrusted to the high-priest subject to the control of the Syrian Governor. Thus the civil and spiritual functions were united in one person, and the pontifical office became an object of competition to the different members of the family of Aaron, and the cause of many violent and disgraceful contests.
As subjects, however, of the Persian kings, the Jews were pre-eminent for their loyalty and good faith. While Egypt, Phœnicia, Cyprus, and other dependencies of the Persian crown, were frequently the scenes of rebellions, which were with difficulty suppressed, the Jews remained steadfast in their allegiance to the “Great King,” and increased rapidly alike in wealth and population.
A single incident distinguishes the uneventful annals of this period. During the lifetime of Ezra and Nehemiah, the high-priest was Eliashib. His successor, Joiada, had two sons, the one Jonathan or Johanan (Neh. xii. 11, 22), the other Joshua. Joshua stood high in the favour of Bagoses, the general of the Persian army, and obtained from him the promise of the high-priesthood. Relying on this assurance, he ventured to quarrel openly with his brother in the Temple, and fell slain by his hand within the precincts of the sanctuary itself. So flagrant a crime roused the indignation of Bagoses. Advancing to Jerusalem he demanded admittance into the Temple, and when the Jews would have prevented his entrance, declared he was less unclean than the body of the murdered man, and not only polluted the sanctuary by entering it, but also levied a fine of 50 shekels on every lamb offered in sacrifice during the next seven years.
Like his father, Johanan also had two sons, Jaddua (Neh. xii. 11) and Manasseh. Jaddua succeeded to the high-priesthood, B.C. 341, and distinguished himself by zealously maintaining the Mosaic institutions as restored by Ezra and Nehemiah. Manasseh, on the other hand, married the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite3, thus contracting one of those alliances, against which the Princes of the Captivity had so energetically protested. This roused the indignation of the elders in Jerusalem, and of Jaddua himself, who declared that Manasseh must put away his wife, or be no longer associated in the priesthood. This the other declined to do, and repaired to his father-in-law in Samaria, who suggested the building of a temple on Mount Gerizim, where Manasseh might continue to exercise his priestly functions. With the permission of the Persian court, this was accordingly done, and Manasseh became the first priest of the Samaritans at their rival sanctuary, being joined from time to time by those Jews who had been guilty of criminal offences in their own country, or had any cause for dissatisfaction4.
Though by these immigrations the Samaritans were more and more recalled from idolatry, the building of this temple tended in no small degree to stimulate the animosity between the two nations. The Jews affirmed that sacrifice could only be offered at Jerusalem; the Samaritans replied that on Gerizim Joshua had built his first altar, and that it was the true place of sacrifice. The controversy thus generated gradually extended, and produced that intense degree of illwill between the two peoples, to which there are several allusions in the New Testament (Lk. ix. 51–56; Jn. iv. 9, viii. 48).
During the high-priesthood of Jaddua, the Persian empire, to which the Jews had so long been faithful, crumbled to pieces before the armies of Alexander the Great. Victorious over the Persian forces at the Granicus, B.C. 334, and again at Issus in the following year, the conqueror captured Damascus, and having taken Sidon, laid siege to Tyre, B.C. 332. Thence he sent a message to the high-priest at Jerusalem, demanding the transference of his allegiance, and auxiliaries and supplies for his army. This Jaddua declared was impossible, on the ground of his oath of fidelity to the Persian monarch. Though incensed at this reply, Alexander delayed to execute his vengeance, till after the reduction of Tyre, and then set out for the Holy City. Jaddua and his people were in the utmost consternation. Sacrifices were offered, prayers were put up to God, and the Divine aid sought to appease the wrath of the invader. At length the high-priest is said to have been warned in a dream how to act. He hung the city with garlands, threw open the gates, and as soon as he was informed that Alexander drew near, clad in his pontifical robes, and followed by the priests in their ceremonial attire and the people in white garments, he went forth to meet him at Sapha, probably Mizpeh, the watch-tower, on the high ridge to the north of the city.
As soon as the Grecian conqueror beheld the venerable form of the high-priest, he fell prostrate, and adored the holy Name inscribed in golden letters on the frontal of his tiara. The Phœnicians and Chaldæans in his retinue, ancient enemies of the Jewish people, were only awaiting the signal to pillage the city and put the high-priest to the torture. They could not, therefore, conceal their astonishment, while the Syrian chiefs concluded that the great conqueror had lost his senses, and Parmenio addressing him enquired why he, whom all the world worshipped, should kneel before the high-priest. “It is not the high-priest,” replied the other, “whom I worship, but his God, who has honoured him with the priesthood. In a vision at Dios in Macedonia, I saw him arrayed precisely as he now stands, and when I was debating how I might obtain the dominion of Asia, he exhorted me to make no delay, but boldly cross over the sea, for he would conduct my army, and give me victory over the Persians.”
Then taking Jaddua by the right hand, he entered the city, and repairing to the Temple, offered sacrifice to God, and paid high honours to the whole priestly body. The prophecies of Daniel5 were now read in his hearing, and overjoyed at the prediction there recorded that a Greek would overthrow the Persian Empire, he offered the Jews whatever privilege they might select. Thereupon they requested that the free enjoyment of their lives and liberties might be secured to them, as also to their brethren in Media and Babylonia, and that they might be exempted from tribute during the Sabbatical years. These privileges the conqueror willingly conceded.
This famous visit is recorded only by Josephus, and has been discredited on the ground that it is not mentioned by Arrian or Plutarch, Diodorus or Curtius. But it has been observed that, though probably incorrect in some of the details, there are several points which confirm the truth of the main facts. Thus Curtius himself relates that, after the capture of Tyre, Alexander visited some of the cities which refused to submit to him, and that he personally executed vengeance on the Samaritans6. The Jews, moreover, certainly served in the army of Alexander, and were located by him in great numbers in his new city of Alexandria; while the privileges he is said to have conferred upon them undoubtedly existed in later times, and imply some such relation between them and the great conqueror. Moreover, from policy or conviction, Alexander delighted to represent himself as chosen by destiny for the great acts which he achieved, and his visit to Gordium before the battle of Issus, and his pilgrimage to the shrine of Jupiter Ammon alike illustrate the force of religious feelings in connection with his campaigns7.
ON the death of Alexander, B.C. 323, the vast empire, which he had won by his arms, was divided amongst his generals, and Palestine, as a province of Syria, passed into the possession of Laomedon, while Egypt was assigned to Ptolemy Soter. Between these two war soon broke out, and Ptolemy having conquered Cyrene, cast longing eyes on the kingdom of Syria, the harbours of Phœnicia, and the iron and timber, which abounded in Palestine and amongst the lofty ridges of Libanus and Anti-Libanus. Accordingly he invaded the realms of Laomedon, defeated him in a great battle, and gained possession of all Syria and Phœnicia.
The Jews on this occasion manifested such unwillingness to violate their engagements to the Syrian king, that Ptolemy advanced against Jerusalem, and besieged it with a large army. Entering the city B.C. 320, under pretence of offering sacrifice on the Sabbath-day, when the scruples of the inhabitants forbade their offering any defence, he easily succeeded in capturing it. Instead, however, of following up his victory by an indiscriminate massacre, he contented himself with transporting a great number of the inhabitants to Egypt, where he distributed them as garrisons in different places, but especially in Alexandria, and conceded to them equal privileges with the Macedonians themselves. Eight years afterwards he transported another large body of them to Libya and Cyrene, and thus by successive deportations and voluntary immigrations on the part of the people themselves, Egypt became an important centre of Jewish influence.
The king of Egypt, however, was not allowed to remain long in undisturbed possession of his prize, and found it disputed with him by Antigonus, one of the most turbulent of the successors of Alexander. Twice the coveted province fell into the hands of his rival, twice Ptolemy managed to recover it, and it was finally adjudged to his share after the decisive battle of Ipsus in Phrygia, B.C. 301.
Meanwhile Jaddua had been succeeded in the high-priesthood at Jerusalem by his son Onias I., and he again by Simon the Just, the last of the men of the “Great Synagogue8,” as he was called by the Jews. He superintended the repair of the sanctuary of the Temple, surrounded with brass the cistern or “sea” of the principal court, fortified the city-walls, and maintained the sacred ritual with much pomp and ceremony (Eccles. i. 1–22). He is also said to have completed the Canon of the Old Testament, by adding to it the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, of Chronicles and Esther, as also the prophecies of Malachi9. He died B.C. 291.
The battle of Ipsus, besides securing to Ptolemy Soter the dominion of Palestine, Phœnicia, and Cœlesyria, elevated Seleucus to the command of an Empire greater than any other held by the successors of Alexander. He assumed the title of “king of Syria,” and his dominion, in the words of the prophet Daniel (Dan. xi. 5), was a great dominion, extending from the Euxine to the confines of Arabia, and from the Hindokush to the Mediterranean. His Eastern capital he founded on the banks of the Tigris, and called Seleucia, after his own name. For his western metropolis he selected a spot admirably situated both for military and commercial purposes10, on the left bank of the river Orontes, just where “the chain of Lebanon running northwards, and the chain of Taurus running eastwards, are brought to an abrupt meeting11.” Here he founded a city with much display in the year B.C. 300, and called it Antioch, after the name of his father Antiochus. Convinced, like the Egyptian monarchs, of the loyalty of the Jews, he began to invite many of them to his new capital and other cities in Asia Minor, assuring them of the same privileges which they enjoyed under Ptolemy in Alexandria. This invitation was readily embraced by many of the Jews, who settled down in Antioch, were governed by their own ethnarch, and were admitted to the same advantages as the Greeks12.
Ptolemy Philadelphus succeeded his father Ptolemy Soter, B.C. 283. In pursuance of the policy of the previous reign, he distinguished himself by uniform kindness to the Jewish nation, ransoming many who had been sold as slaves, and inviting many to settle in Egypt. A liberal patron of literature and science, he established a famous library at Alexandria, and spared no pains in procuring books to be deposited therein. He is also represented to have caused the Hebrew Scriptures to be translated into Greek, and thus to have originated the celebrated Version called the Septuagint, from the tradition that 72 persons were engaged in the translation, which obtained a wide circulation, and was extensively read. The same monarch conferred costly presents on the Temple at Jerusalem, consisting of a table for the shewbread of marvellous workmanship, cisterns of gold, bowls, and other vessels for the public and private use of the priests13.
ON the death of Philadelphus, Ptolemy Euergetes succeeded to the Egyptian throne. The new king considerably extended the privileges of the Jews, and bestowed many presents upon their Temple. During his reign an incident occurred, which illustrates in a striking manner at once the condition of Judæa at this time, and the influence of individual members of the chosen nation.
On the death of Simon “the Just,” his brother Eleazar became high-priest B.C. 291. He was succeeded in B.C. 276, not by his own son Onias, but his uncle Manasseh, the son of Jaddua. At his death, B.C. 250, the son of Simon, Onias II., became high-priest, but inherited none of his father’s virtues, being distinguished for nothing but meanness, and an inordinate love of money. The older he grew, the more avaricious he became, and neglected from year to year to remit to Ptolemy Euergetes the customary tribute of 20 talents of silver. At length, about B.C. 226, that king sent his commissioner Athenion to Jerusalem to demand the arrears, and threatened violence, if his claims were not satisfied. The Jews were filled with dismay at the too probable consequences of continued disobedience, but Onias still persisted in his refusal.
At length his nephew Joseph took upon him the task of appeasing the royal anger, and having ingratiated himself with Athenion persuaded him to return to Alexandria, and promised that he himself would speedily follow, and satisfy every demand. Shortly afterwards he himself set out, and on his way fell in with several men of distinction belonging to Phœnicia and Cœlesyria who were going up to the Egyptian capital to compete for the farming of the revenues, which were annually sold to the highest bidder. Not suspecting a competitor in the Jew, whose slender equipage contrasted unfavourably with their splendid cavalcade, they unwittingly revealed the amount at which the revenues had been farmed.
Thereupon Joseph resolved to outbid them, and in an audience with the king contrived by his cleverness and ready address completely to win the royal favour. When the day for the auction came, the nobles of Phœnicia and Cœlesyria bid 8000 talents for the farming of the revenues. But Joseph came forward and engaged to pay twice that sum, in addition to all the goods which should be confiscated for neglect of payment. Thereupon Ptolemy granted his request, and he became collector of the revenues from Judæa, Samaria, Cœlesyria, and Phœnicia, and was furnished with a guard of 2000 soldiers to extort payment from the refractory.
Having liquidated the arrears due from his uncle, Joseph returned to Palestine to carry out his instructions. Excited by the disappointed collectors, Askelon at first refused payment, and treated his demands with insult. But Joseph was not to be trifled with. He slew 20 of the chief inhabitants, and sent 1000 talents of their confiscated property to the king, who highly commended his determination. A similar instance of severity at Scythopolis14 put down all further opposition, and Joseph was at length universally acknowledged as the collector for the Egyptian king, and held the office upwards of 22 years. He now became the founder of a family, which vied with that of the high-priest in power and influence, and became the occasion of many serious quarrels between them.
The reign of Ptolemy Euergetes came to a sudden and tragical close. In the year B.C. 222 he was assassinated by his own son Ptolemy IV., who in irony was called Philopator, the lover of his father. As soon as he ascended the throne, he murdered his mother Berenice, and his brother Magas, and gave himself up to luxury and dissipation. Taking advantage of his well-known effeminacy, Antiochus the Great welcomed the offer of Theodotus, governor of Cœlesyria, to surrender that province, and after a brief campaign became master of Phœnicia, Tyre, Ptolemais, Damascus, and the greater part of Cœlesyria. Roused at length from his lethargy, the Egyptian monarch confronted his rival at Raphia, between Rhinocorura and Gaza, and defeated him with enormous loss, B.C. 217, the same year that Hannibal was victorious at Thrasymene.
Meanwhile the Jews had remained steadfast in their allegiance to Ptolemy, and the conqueror visited Jerusalem, offered sacrifices according to the Jewish law, and presented rich gifts to the Temple. Attracted by the beauty of the building, and the solemnity of the service, he desired to penetrate into the Holy of Holies. Simon II., who had succeeded Onias, together with the priests, entreated him to desist from his purpose, but this only increased his determination to view the interior, and he pressed forward, amidst the dismay of the pontiff and the lamentation of the people, towards the sanctuary. Here, however, he was seized with a sudden and supernatural terror, and was carried forth half-dead. Enraged at this repulse, he retired to Alexandria, and wreaked his vengeance on the numerous Jews who had settled there. Some he is said to have put to death, others he degraded from their high positions and consigned to slavery, or reduced to the lowest class of citizens. Thirteen years afterwards, B.C. 204, he died a victim to his sensual habits, and was succeeded by his son Ptolemy Epiphanes, then only five years old.
Meanwhile, since his disastrous defeat at Raphia, Antiochus had been gradually strengthening his position in Upper Asia, where he had won his title of “the Great” by his successes against the Parthians and Bactrians, as also on the banks of the Indus. Having thus re-established the supremacy of the Seleucidæ he returned to Western Asia, to find his old rival dead, and the Egyptian throne in the possession of a child. He instantly embraced the opportunity of attacking the Egyptian dominions, and in concert with Philip III. of Macedon resolved to avenge the defeat at Raphia. In the campaigns that ensued the Jews suffered severely, and became in turn the prey of each of the contending parties15. In B.C. 203, Antiochus succeeded in taking Jerusalem. In B.C. 199 it was retaken by Scopas, the general of the Egyptian forces. Next year Antiochus reappeared in the field, and at the foot of Mount Panium16, near the sources of the Jordan, gained a decisive victory over Scopas, capturing that general himself and the remnant of his forces, which had fled for refuge to Sidon.
Wearied of the struggle, and remembering the indignities offered to their sanctuary by Philopator, the Jews now threw off their subjection to Egypt, welcomed the conqueror as their deliverer, and furnished supplies for his army. Antiochus in his turn treated his new subjects with liberality and kindness. He not only guaranteed to them perfect freedom and protection in the exercise of their religion, but promised to restore their city to its ancient splendour, forbade the intrusion of strangers in their Temple, and contributed largely towards the regular celebration of its services. At the same time, imitating the examples of Alexander and Seleucus, he issued orders to Zeuxis, the general of his forces, to remove 2000 Jewish families from Babylon into Lydia and Phrygia, where they were to be permitted to use their own laws, to have lands assigned them, and to be exempted from all tribute for ten years17.
THE battle of Mount Panium marks an era in the history of the Jews. For a century since the battle of Ipsus they had been steadfast in their allegiance to the Egyptian throne. They now transferred it from the descendants of the Ptolemies to those of Seleucus Nicator, and their connection with the Syrian kings begins.
Antiochus, who had bestowed upon them so many privileges, did not long enjoy the fruits of his victory. His chief ally in the late campaign had been Philip of Macedon, who, at the conclusion of the third war against Carthage, found himself attacked by the forces of the great Republic of the West now commencing its conquest of the world. Deserted by his friend Antiochus, whose aid he might reasonably have expected, he was forced after three campaigns to sue for peace, and the Romans became supreme in Macedonia and Greece, B.C. 197.
Five years afterwards Antiochus found his turn was come to feel the weight of the same all-conquering arms. In the year B.C. 192 he crossed over into Greece on the invitation of the Ætolians, and under the expectation of a general rising of the Greeks ventured on a campaign with Rome, entrenching himself at Thermopylæ18. But in the following year the consul M. Acilius Glabrio attacked him in his entrenchments, and speedily put his whole army to flight. Thereupon the Syrian king hastened back to Asia, and employed himself in collecting a vast host from all parts of his dominions, wherewith to prosecute the campaign, which his friend Hannibal truly warned him was close at hand. In B.C. 190 the Romans, under Scipio Africanus and his brother Scipio Asiaticus, crossed the Hellespont, and Antiochus confronted them in the neighbourhood of Magnesia19, at the foot of Mount Sipylus. His motley hosts, though aided by numerous elephants and the Macedonian phalanx, were utterly unable to resist the terrible Roman legions. Defeated with a loss of 50,000 men, the haughty Syrian was constrained to sue for peace. The conditions exacted by the conquerors were the death-blow of the Syrian empire. Antiochus was forced to cede all his dominions in Asia Minor west of Mount Taurus; to surrender all his ships of war, and retain no more than 10 merchant vessels; to keep no elephants; to raise no mercenaries in any of the countries allied with Rome; to pay down 2500 Euboic talents at once, and 12,000 more by instalments of 1000 a year; and to deliver up Hannibal and other enemies of Rome who had taken refuge in his dominions.
Beaten, baffled, and disgraced, the Syrian monarch returned to his capital. The hard conditions of peace were approved by the senate B.C. 188, and to raise the heavy tribute, which threatened to exhaust all the resources of his empire, he resolved to plunder the temples throughout his dominions. The first attack it was agreed should be made on that of Elymais, situated at the meeting-point of the caravan routes which connected Media with Persia and Susiana. But the guards of the temple, aided by the hardy mountaineers of the district, made a vigorous defence of their shrine, and Antiochus was slain, B.C. 18720 (Dan. xi. 19).
On the news of his death, his son Seleucus ascended the throne, and assumed the title of Philopator. During the early period of his reign, the new king carefully abstained from giving any offence to the Jewish nation, guaranteed to them the free exercise of their religion, and even contributed to the expenses of the Temple services (2 Macc. iii. 2, 3).
Before long, however, his attention was directed to the riches deposited in the sanctuary at Jerusalem. At this time that city presented an appearance of much external prosperity. The high-priest Onias III, who succeeded Simon B.C. 195, was held in high respect, and ruled the people with firmness and vigour (2 Macc. iii. 1). But an untoward cause of intestine dissension soon arose, and led to the interference of the Syrian king.
Joseph, the collector of the revenues of Phœnicia and Cœlesyria, had left behind him an illegitimate son, named Hyrcanus. Between this son and his legitimate brothers a serious quarrel arose respecting their father’s property. Onias espoused the cause of Hyrcanus, and on his death secured his property in the treasury of the Temple, the custody of which was now held by one Simon, who is supposed by some to have been a son of Joseph (2 Macc. iii. 4). Filled with spite against the high-priest he gave information to Apollonius the governor of Phœnicia and Cœlesyria respecting the amount of treasure contained in the Temple, and represented that it might without difficulty be applied to the king’s use (2 Macc. iii. 4–6). The governor reported this to Seleucus, and the Syrian king, straitened for means to pay the Roman tribute, directed his treasurer Heliodorus not only to penetrate into the Temple, but plunder it of its funds.
Heliodorus arrived at Jerusalem, communicated his instructions, and demanded the surrender of the money. In vain the high-priest expostulated on the insult which would be offered to the national sanctuary, and declared that one half the treasures belonged to God, and the other to widows and orphans, who had placed it there for security. Heliodorus declared that his orders must be carried out, demolished the outer gates, and was on the point of entering the sanctuary, when, like Ptolemy Philopator, he too was struck with a panic terror, which prostrated him speechless on the ground, so that he had to be carried away insensible by his retinue (2 Macc. iii. 26–30). Restored, however, by the prayers of Onias, he gradually recovered, and returning to Antioch related all that had occurred, and declared to his Syrian lord that nothing would induce him to venture again on such an errand.
On the death of Antiochus the Great, it had been agreed between the senate of Rome and Seleucus that he should send his son Demetrius to take the place, as a hostage, of his brother Antiochus, who was to be allowed to come back to Syria. Shortly after his return from Jerusalem, Demetrius departed for this purpose, and Heliodorus, in the absence of the two persons nearest in succession to the throne, poisoned his master and usurped the crown. News of this reached Antiochus as he was visiting Athens on his way to the Syrian capital. He instantly invoked the aid of Eumenes king of Pergamus, at this time master of the greater part of the territories in Asia Minor wrested by the Romans from his father, and having quickly crushed the usurper, ascended the Syrian throne, and assumed the title of Epiphanes, or the Illustrious, while his nephew Demetrius remained a hostage at Rome21, B.C. 175.
THE long-continued subjection of the Jews to Grecian monarchs had by this time exerted a very considerable influence on their habits and mode of life. Familiar not only with the language but the literature and philosophy of Greece, many had acquired a strong taste for Grecian studies, preferred the Grecian religion to their own, adopted Grecian manners, and practised Grecian arts. Amongst this Hellenizing party none was more active than Joshua the brother of the high-priest, who even assumed the Grecian name of Jason.
On the accession of Epiphanes he made his appearance among the princes who flocked to Antioch to assure the new monarch of their allegiance, and by his insinuating manners rapidly rose into high favour. Knowing the depressed condition of the Syrian exchequer, in consequence of the annual tribute to Rome, he offered the king the tempting bribe of 440 talents of silver to secure the deposition of his elder brother, and his own appointment to the high-priesthood. Successful in this he caused Onias to be summoned to Antioch, and kept there as a prisoner at large, and then returning to Jerusalem devoted himself to the work of introducing Grecian customs among the people.
By a second bribe of 150 talents he obtained permission from his patron to establish at Jerusalem a gymnasium for athletic exercises, and with such success that even the priests despised the Temple and neglected the sacrifices to take part in the games (2 Macc. iv. 14). He next procured a license to establish an academy in which the Jewish youth might be brought up in the Grecian fashion, and was empowered to confer the citizenship of Antioch on many of his fellow-countrymen, who eagerly coveted the empty honour (2 Macc. iv. 9). Not content with this, in the year B.C. 174 he went so far as to send a deputation with 300 drachmas of silver to Tyre, towards the celebration of the games in honour of the tutelary deity, Hercules. But even his own partisans shrunk from such open idolatry, and in place of bestowing the money on the games, preferred to offer it towards the building of a fleet (2 Macc. iv. 20).
For three years the high-priest continued his work of corrupting the manners of his people, and then found the means he had used to acquire his ill-gotten dignity turned against himself. Having occasion to send his brother Onias IV., who had assumed the name of Menelaus, to the Syrian court, his envoy embraced the opportunity of offering Antiochus 300 talents a year more than his brother had paid for the office of high-priest, and succeeded in supplanting him in the royal favour (2 Macc. iv. 24). Escorted by a body of Syrian troops, he then expelled Jason, who fled into the country of the Ammonites, and assuming the position and title of high-priest, proved even more wicked than his predecessor.
For some time, however, he delayed to make the stipulated payment to Antiochus, and when Sostratus, the commander of the Acra, had made several ineffectual demands for it, they were both summoned to the Syrian capital. At the time of their arrival Epiphanes was absent in Cilicia, and had left Andronicus in charge of affairs. Finding that in some way the money must be procured, Menelaus sent instructions to his brother Lysimachus to abstract some of the golden vessels of the Temple, and having secretly sold them at Tyre, obtained sufficient money to liquidate the debt and bribe over Andronicus to espouse his cause. The sacrilegious sale, however, transpired, and came to the ears of the venerable Onias III., the legitimate high-priest, who severely reproved the usurper for his conduct. Enraged at this reproof, Menelaus prevailed on the king’s deputy to seize the aged priest and put him to death (2 Macc. iv. 27–35). This atrocious deed roused the utmost indignation amongst the Jews at Antioch, and the Syrian king stripped Andronicus of the purple, and ordered him to be executed on the very spot, where the venerable priest, whose sober and modest behaviour (2 Macc. iv. 37) he always respected, had been murdered.
At this time the thoughts of Antiochus were fixed on the reduction of Egypt. In B.C. 171 he led his forces through Palestine and defeated the Egyptians before Pelusium. In the following year he led a second expedition, and taking advantage of the occupation of the Romans with the war against Perseus, the last king of Macedonia, evaded the condition of the late treaty22, which restricted his fleet to 10 ships, and attacked Egypt by sea and land. Again he was successful, and reduced the whole country with the exception of Alexandria.
While he was before the walls of this city, a report reached Palestine that he was dead. On this Jason, taking advantage of the unpopularity of Menelaus, placed himself at the head of 1000 men, seized Jerusalem, and, while his brother secured himself in the castle of Zion, put great numbers of the Jews to death (2 Macc. v. 5, 6).
The first intelligence of these events received by Antiochus represented that all Judæa was in a state of rebellion, and that the Jews were rejoicing in his supposed death. Enraged at these tidings he instantly made preparations for marching upon Jerusalem, whence Jason, hearing of his approach, fled into the country of the Ammonites. The city was taken by storm, and the late proceedings being considered as a revolt, it was resolved to inflict a proportionate punishment. Accordingly for three days Antiochus surrendered the capital to the fury and license of his soldiers, and during this period 40,000 of the inhabitants were slain, and an equal number sold into captivity. Under the guidance of the impious Menelaus, he then entered the Sanctuary, seized all the sacred vessels, and searching even the subterranean vaults, carried off treasure to the amount of 1800 talents of gold. He next ordered a great sow to be sacrificed on the brazen altar of burnt-offering, a portion of the flesh to be boiled, and the liquor poured over every part of the Temple; and having thus drained the capital of its treasure, drenched the streets with blood, and profaned its Sanctuary, handed it over once more to the administration of Menelaus, supported by Philip, a Phrygian, and for manners more barbarous than he that set him there (2 Macc. v. 15–23; 1 Macc. i. 20–28).