all the more easy to maintain an annual commemoration of it.' The country now enjoyed a period of tranquillity; Alcimus was obliged to flee again to the court; and the hand of Nicanor, which he had but a short time before blasphemously raised on high against the temple, was hung up at one of the great gates in perpetual remembrance.2

Thus did the fortune of war waver from side to side, whilst it was gradually inclining more and more perceptibly to the champion whom nothing could crush. Had the Syrian kingdom been in the position of Egypt when Israel contended against it under the leadership of Moses, had it been still free and sufficiently powerful, the struggle, which had already become so deadly, might have reached a termination productive of the purest good for the ancient people of Israel. But Rome already cast its shadow far and deep enough to reach to Asia; and among the leaders in this contest carried on by the people so venerable and yet so young the ambiguous question had' been already mooted whether it was not expedient for Israel to follow the example of so many other small nations and seek its aid. The league which two able Judeans, Eupolemus 3 and Jason, son of Eleazar, entreated Judas to conclude with the Romans, but the actual accomplishment of which he did not live to see, might have seemed called for in the general position of affairs, as it was known that the Romans were favourably disposed to every enemy of Demetrius Sôtêr; but it involved consequences which its promoters never considered, and it shows what an interval there was between this era of the 'people of God,' in spite of its new aspiration, and the pure courage of the nobler days of its past; for every one of the greater prophets of old would have lifted up his voice against it. Thus the great elevation of the people, both in so far as it

1 Cf. p. 232.

2

5

1 Macc. vii. 35-38, 47, and with much circumstantial detail, but with great freedom, in 2 Macc. xiv. sq. According to later statements, the so-called beautiful gate, Acts iii. 2, was also called Nicanor's gate; a great deal has been said about it, but with little clear historical basis; cf. Mish. Middoth, i. 4, ii. 3, 6 ad fin., Shekalim, 6, 3, &c.

P. 284 note 2.

4 1 Macc. viii. On Eupolemus cf. also 2 Macc. iv. 11; whether he was the historian Eupolemus is discussed below. An earlier interference of the Romans is only mentioned in 2 Macc. xi. 34-38.

According to Jos. Ant. xii. 10, 6; 11, 2, Alcimus died before Judas, in which

case the latter, elected high-priest by the people, filled the office for three years. But this is in too clear contradiction of the language of 1 Macc. vii. 1, 50, ix. 1-3, 54-56. Gradually, however, it became the custom (as 2 Macc. shows) to transfer all the greatness of the age to Judas, and consequently also to regard him as the first Asmonean high-priest. On the other hand, in the list of high-priests in Jos. Ant. xx. 10, 2, derived from another source, his name does not occur at all.

On this see the distinct testimony of Diodorus, in C. Müller's Fragm. Hist. Græc. ii. p. 11 sq. Even the Median satrap obtained from Rome a decree on his side.

was a national movement, and in so far as it made for the true religion, had received in its very beginning an irremediable blow, as the whole subsequent history will show.

5) The days of Judas, however, were now numbered. The Syrian king unexpectedly sent forward the whole of his southern army, under Bacchides and Alcimus. The troops marched southwards from the Samaritan boundary upon Galgala. At Masaloth, in spite of a large number of Judeans who hastily opposed their course, they succeeded in effecting a bloody passage to Jerusalem,' and, in the first month (April) of the year 161, stood beneath its walls. The people, who were celebrating the Passover, were necessarily quite unprepared for so swift a campaign, after a defeat so severe. Judas quickly collected three thousand men north of Jerusalem, at a place called Eleasah. Bacchides now advanced against him with twenty thousand infantry and two thousand horse, as far as BeerZâth. The troops of Judas, however, had so little desire to contend against such overwhelming forces that in a short time he had but eight hundred men left on whose courage he could rely. These he encouraged to the desperate struggle, firmly determined to conquer or to die. Bacchides had disposed his army in the regular battle array; he himself commanded the right wing. The battle raged the whole day, and when Judas perceived on which wing Bacchides was posted he attacked it with the most valiant of his men, and drove it in flight as far as the neighbouring mountain of Azôth. But, in the meantime, the enemy's left wing wheeled round opportunely, and beset the victors in the rear. Judas fell, and his troops fled in haste: but his brothers, Jonathan and Simon, succeeded in carrying off his body."

Galgala may be the modern Gilgilia, north of Gophna (p. 318 note 4); of Masaloth, 'Apßnois, we do not now know anything further, unless Meiselon, which we shall meet with again in the life of Alexander Jannæus, be the place intended. Josephus, however, is certainly arbitrary (Ant. xii. 11, 1) in making Galgal into Galilee, and referring to the Arbel there. Since the campaigns of Judas already mentioned, p. 314, the whole field of battle was limited to Judea. Gilead, also, which some MSS. and the Pesh. have, is out of place. Compare further the observations in the Jahrbb. der Bibl. Wiss. vi. p. 112 sq.

2 This is the form correctly given by some MSS. in 1 Macc. ix. 4; even in Jos. some MSS. at least have Bnphe.

We may therefore with great probability refer to the present Bîr-ez-Zeit (Robinson, Bib. Res. ii. p. 264, ed. 1856), somewhat north of Gophna. This further defines the place of Eleasah, y, which is not mentioned elsewhere. The general reading, Beera, must refer to the ancient Beeroth, which lay south of Gophna.

3 In Jos. Aja, according to some ancient MSS. also "AÇapa. Westwards of Bîr-ez-Zeit there really is a mountain to which a place in the neighbourhood seems to have given its modern name, Atâra. The Philistine Ashdod is quite out of the question, owing to its position.

While Ben-Gorion collects all possible stories about Mattathias and Judas, and relates them in their broadest and most unhistorical form, iii. 7-23, what he says

2. Jonathan the Asmonean, High-Priest.

The immediate results of this defeat and of the death of the heroic Judas, whose inspired devotion to the good cause had been proved so fully during seven years, were exceedingly melancholy. The religious freedom conceded two years before by Lysias and Antiochus Eupator was completely abolished; and the party of the heathen, supported by Bacchides, and with Alcimus at their head, seized the favourable moment to make a last and violent effort to suppress the opposite party altogether. The favour of the Syrians rested everywhere on those who were hostile to the pious-and all power was placed in their hands. The early friends of Judas, on the other hand, were sought out, betrayed, mocked, and punished. Through the unproductiveness of the soil a great famine was added to their troubles, and the land seemed to have become as faithless and false as her children.1 This dire distress forced the surviving friends of Judas to combine still more closely, and to transfer the leadership to his youngest brother, Jonathan, whose valour was long tried and who even surpassed Judas in craft. The report of their enterprise soon spread, and its immediate effect could only be to increase the danger and difficulty of their position. Jonathan retired with his followers into the wilderness of Tekoa, south-east of Jerusalem, and pitched his camp in the open country, near the great well of Asphar. His next step was to send away all the women, children, and goods, the care of which was rendered difficult by their situation, under the protection of his eldest brother, Johanan. They were to go round the south of the Dead Sea to the Nabateans wandering in the wildernesses on the east, as these were striving to maintain their freedom erect against the Syrians. Upon his way, Johanan arrived with the company in his charge at Mêdebâ, formerly a Moabite city. Here he was attacked by the resident tribe of Amri,3 who captured and slew him. Jonathan, however, availed himself of an opportunity which speedily presented itself to cross the Jordan

2

of Jonathan and Simeon, iv. 1, is extremely brief and wholly unsatisfactory. This is the meaning of 1 Macc. ix. 24. 2 P. 314.

Or, spelt in its Greek form, 'Außpi, certainly a tribe (like many others in those countries) at the same time occupied in commerce and stationary, and yet upon occasion ready to plunder. The ancient national hostility between Moab and

Israel might still from time to time flame up vividly in many minds. Cf. p. 313, vol. iii. p. 86 sq.

The tribe was celebrating the marriage of one of its principal men with the daughter of a rich merchant living in Nadabatha (probably an adjoining village), and for this purpose had marched out inoffensively into the open country. The expression of Xavaáv, 1 Macc. ix. 37,

with his most valiant men and inflict a bloody revenge upon these robbers. Laden with rich booty, he was returning through the forest-clad hills which bound the Jordan valley on the east, and had descended as far as the low marshy district where the Jordan discharges itself into the Dead Sea, when he saw that Bacchides, who must have received his information from traitors, was already on the ground before him with his powerful army, and had taken up his position at the fords of the Jordan a little further to the north. In this desperate situation he attacked the Syrian general in the most daring manner, in spite of the reliance of the latter on the aid of the sabbath day, drove him back with loss, and escaped with his own followers by swimming across the Jordan. Bacchides, however, soon returned to Jerusalem unmolested, and pushed on his measures with all the more energy. Besides Jerusalem, he fortified a number of cities round it with the utmost strength, and provided them with supplies, and placed the sons of the most eminent persons in the country in prison, as hostages, in the great citadel at Jerusalem.

2

In the year 160, however, Alcimus, who was intending to make some change in the inner court of the temple, without any reference to consecrated usage,3 suddenly died, in the month of May, after a short but painful illness. Upon this, Bacchides thought it no longer worth while to keep up his previous severity, and accordingly returned to the court, leaving orders with his subordinates not to molest the pious. This was probably the first result of Roman intercession. Two years of tranquillity sufficed to prove clearly how soon the party of the strict could completely recover from their defeats and claim the ascendency in the country. This induced the chiefs of the

betokens in the later language simply persons engaged in trade, often with a side wind of contempt. As for the main narrative, the writer had begun in ver. 34 to relate the ultimate consequences too soon, and does not return to these till ver. 43.

This is certainly the meaning of the more general expression banks of the Jordan,' ver. 43. That the waters of the Jordan and the Dead Sea rise considerably above the banks in certain seasons, particularly in the north-east corner between the two, is well established (cf. Lynch, Narrative of the United States Expedition to the River Jordan and the Dead Sea, and Ritter's Erdbeschreib. xv. pp. 535, 547, 553). Mêdebâ lies almost due east of this corner, more in the interior of the country.

21 Macc. ix. 50-52. The places which he thus turned into fortresses were Jericho, Emmaus, p. 310, Beth-horon, Bethel, Thamnath-Pharathon (with this additional designation to distinguish it from other cities, it was probably that on the west of Jerusalem), and Taphon (otherwise Tappûah) in the south-west. He further fortified Jerusalem, Beth-zur, already so often mentioned, and Gazara, p. 311 note 1.

According to 1 Macc. ix. 54, it seems probable that his plan was to unite the inner, i.e. the priests', court more closely with the outer court. The whole temple, however, but especially its sanctuary and inner fore-court, was still regarded as the work of the last ancient prophets, p. 102 sqq., i.e. as a sacred work,

heathen party to urge Bacchides once more to make an effort against the brothers of Judas, representing that if he would come now they could deliver all the leaders of the hostile party into his power at one blow, and thus his conquest of the country would be finally completed. This infernal plan (of which we do not know any further details) was, in the meantime, betrayed to the brothers of Judas before Bacchides arrived. They, on their part, inflicted severe retaliation, and executed about fifty of the leaders of the heathen party. It was now necessary for Bacchides to come in person as judge-in-chief. The brothers of Judas, however, with their bravest adherents, had already taken refuge in a fortress named Beth-basi,' which probably lay at a considerable distance in the wilderness on the south; and this, by artificial works and by their own valour, they rendered impregnable. Bacchides despatched his whole army, reinforced by the levies, to besiege them, and carried off numerous prisoners out of the country. Jonathan, however, with a few of his most daring followers, cut his way through, like David of old, in these southern districts, sought to strengthen himself by forays on the inhabitants of the wilder-. ness, and defeated a powerful tribe among them.2 This swiftly secured for him an unexpected strength, and he appeared suddenly to make a further attack on the besiegers, while his brother Simon, who had been left behind in the fortress, ventured on several sorties, which proved successful. These events led to a quarrel between Bacchides himself and the heathen party, such as had arisen on a previous occasion after similar occurrences.3 He had a number of them executed, and became weary of the whole affair; so that when Jonathan cunningly proposed terms of peace he was ready to concede them. Jonathan received back all the prisoners, and was at liberty from this time to settle quietly at Machmash (or Michmash) on the north of Jerusalem, to aid and protect the party of the strict, and expel the heathen party

1 Twice mentioned in 1 Macc. ix. 62, 64; perhaps the form given by the Pesh., Beth-basin, is better. What is the place intended is now very obscure; it is perhaps the same as 1, which in Josh. xv. 28 (without , cf. note on Cant. p. 150), is combined with Beersheba; at any rate its situation in the far south would suit well. Josephus, Ant. xiii. 1, 5, has instead Bŋoaλaya, but this is equally or even still more obscure. Another reason why these names have become so obscure to us is, that the

Onomasticon of the Fathers does not include the Apocrypha. Reland supposed that Bnoaλayd was a clerical error for Bndayλd: in this case we should do best to refer it to the place of that name, which, according to the Onomasticon, lay far in the south-west.

The sons of Phasiron,' with their chief Odoarrhê, or according to another reading Odomêra; we have no further knowledge of these names. 3 P. 320.