The Hasmoneans, part nine: between corruption and murder. Did the feud between the brothers bring an end to the kingdom of the Hasmonean dynasty?

Shlomzion left no heirs and therefore her two sons quarreled over the position, and the Romans intervened militarily to help Aristobulus, but the Roman conquest was inevitable even without this affair

It is acceptable to think, to fantasize something, that Rome's takeover of Judah, of the Hasmonean kingdom, would have been avoided if a terrible quarrel had not broken out between the heirs of Shlomzion Alexandra. We will find that out later.

Let's start with the fact that the beginning of the brothers' steps was fraught with great failure, and the blame for that, to a certain extent, was the lady-mother. Shlomzion did not leave behind her any will, written or oral, regarding her royal succession. Moreover, for whatever reason she did not qualify either of her two sons, neither Yehuda Aristobulus nor Yohanan Hyrcanus to serve as a leader before she passed away.

So one of the three: first - she did not have enough time to draw up a will due to any of her illnesses, which seems extremely urgent; secondly - she feared both the adventurism of Aristobulus and the shortcomings of Hyrcanus' leadership; Thirdly - it was exposed to the influence of the Pharisees, who opposed the monarchy in principle, and at least one that connects together the political and the ritual crown.

And what does Yosef ben Matthew say about that? Depends on which connection you rely on. According to the ancients of the Jews, Aristobulus, before Shlomzion's death, made a relatively quick move of two weeks to fortify his inheritance and it was an attempt to take control of all 22 fortresses, including those three - Horkania, Alexandrian and Mekvar, where the queen's treasures were kept, and he did this for fear of the inheritance falling into the hands of the Pharisees while taking into account the impotence of his brother Hyrcanus to rule. Aristobulus surrounded himself with loyalists who formed a royal entourage. Thanks to his wealth he could buy a Jewish and foreign army and promote various leadership bodies.

When these things became known, the queen resorted to back-and-forth. And what did she do? She turned to Hyrcanus and her advisers and authorized them to come to some kind of operative conclusion, with Yosef ben Matthiahu lightly hinting about her illness that attacked her.

In any case, the fact that there is not one successor and one who has been trained for leadership points to a terrible failure by Shlomzion, and one that will seriously undermine stability in Judah.

In Joseph's other book, The Wars of the Jews, a successor was actually known, and he is Yohanan Hyrcanus II, to whom the keys of government were transferred during the lifetime of Mother Shlomzion. But Yehuda Aristobulos did not give up his chances of position, and the two were prepared for a decisive battle near Jericho. Aristobulus won by "points" when most of his brother's army moved to his side and following this, Hyrcanus marched to Antonia's citadel in Jerusalem, forcibly taking Aristobulus' wife and his children as hostages.
This complicated situation brought the two brothers to a somewhat forced reconciliation, during which it was agreed that Aristobulus would serve as king and high priest and Hyrcanus would receive all the privileges reserved for the king's brother. This order was held in the temple and won the public approval in the status of the majority of the public in Jerusalem considering the revival of the ancient practice of the days of the Maccabees.
It is only because Hyrcanus gave up without choice to his brother, who was more energetic and wiser than him and with him was the military force.

A new actor entered the arena of active souls, and perhaps not-so-new, and his name is Antipater (later Herod's father) the Edomite, whose ancestors were exiled to Enos by Yohanan Hyrcanus I, and whose father won a dominant political position with the support of Alexander Yanai and Shlomzion Alexandra, i.e. Strategus (governor ) on all red (Adomaya). This father had close ties with the Arab ethnos and with the cities of Ashkelon and Gaza and his assets were many.

Antipater saw in the complex situation between the Yanai brothers, the Damen Paz to upgrade his power and status and especially in view of the fact that he knew well how to read the geopolitical map of the region - the progress of Rome towards the inheritance of the Hellenistic kingdoms (Egypt and Syria) on the one hand and the expansion attempts of the Armenians from the northeast on the other .

The analysis of the situation by Antipater led him to the conclusion that it is better to forge the ties between him and the deposed Hyrcanus and to bring the adventurous and energetic Aristobulus off the rails. For this purpose he created a rumor factory condemning Aristobulus on the one hand and sought to overthrow Hyrcanus in his net as if the sword of Aristobulus and his followers were placed on his neck.

Finally, after tiresome campaigns of persuasion, Antipater advised Hyrcanus to find refuge with his friend, Herat III, king of the Arab-Nabataeans (reigned between 62-87 BC). In doing so, he indirectly hinted to Harat that the future is to annex again the extensive territories that were robbed from him at the time by the Yanai conquests.

Hyrcanus, doubtless encouraged by the hope of reigning again with the help of the two and doubtless assuming that at this time it is better to protect his own head, slipped away in the dead of night together with Antipater from Jerusalem and the two hurriedly made their way to Petra, a city of the kingdom of Haretat (king of the Arab-Nabataeans).

Charetes provided Hyrcanus with a large army, such as fifty thousand foot and cavalry, in order to face Aristobulus.
It seemed that this move was imposed on Hyrcanus, who was probably dragged by the circumstances of the event, that both Antipater and Charetes rushed him into the heart of the arena of confrontation. Hyrcanus even promised Haret that after his reign he would make sure to return to Haret all the territories that Alexander Yanai conquered from his hands, including Midaba, Tzoer, Ma'ale Ha Lahit and more.

Aristobulus suffered a severe blow and retreated to Jerusalem, when many of his army joined the victorious Hyrcanus and if it wasn't for Marcus Aemilius Scaurus, a senior officer in the Roman Pompey's army, who galloped to Jerusalem at Pompey's behest and made sure to protect Aristobulus from the final blow that Herath's army was supposed to inflict on him, his fate would have been bad and bitter.
This was the signal for the first Roman intervention in Judea.

What is Rome doing in the region? Far from her home and homeland?

Well, Pompey, the third important leg in the Roman triumvirate, together with Julius Caesar and Crassus, was instructed by the mastermind, the manipulator of that third alliance, to strike at the pirate fleets in the Mediterranean (our sea - mare nostrum - in the language of the Romans) that greatly endangered the trade lines The Roman Navy. Pompey carried out the task before and before and raced east towards the Hellenistic kingdoms and their neighbors such as Armenia and eventually took control of Seleucid Syria and became a Roman province in 66 AD.

This move resulted, potentially, in Judea belonging to the Roman Empire. So with or without sibling rivalry, Judah was marked as a member of the Roman imperial fabric.

Furthermore, how will this fact be explained in light of the mutual alliances made between the Hasmoneans and Rome. It seems apparently that morality and politics do not dream together in one subjugation. Perhaps this is true, but Rome had a sufficient reason for what she calls a cause for war (casus belli), Alexander Yanai at the time, "as good-hearted as his successes" not only canceled the mutual contract with Rome but made alliances with Rome's enemies in the east, considering a move that would not be forgiven From the point of view of the Romans. His successor, Shlomzion Alexandra, did not reverse the situation, thus adding sin to crime, and this because it could be assumed with almost certainty, that Rome would take control of the entire eastern Mediterranean.

We will therefore return to Jerusalem besieged by the forces of Hyrcanus (actually under the control of Charetes and Antipater). Jerusalem was divided into two camps, in terms of routine since the pre-Maccabean period, and from this period onward - between the Pharisaic, somewhat popular camp, which supported Hyrcanus, ideologically and physically (and joined him in the siege war), and the Sadducee, priestly camp, which allied with Aristobulus and remained in Jerusalem, among other things also protect the temple. The group of the rich and respected in Jerusalem managed to escape to Egypt, towards Alexandria.
The pro-Hyracnosian mob captured his tenant (not-he is the tenant of the circle, the same one who was once famous for bringing down the rains on a day of drought, after he had appealed to God and was granted), and demanded that he conduct a prayer against Aristobulus and his faction. He refused to perform the "Pulsa Denora" ceremony and raised his voice in supplication that God would not give in to either the supporters of Hyrcanus or the supporters of Aristobulus, with each side wishing for the downfall of the other. This response provoked the fury of the crowd and the extremists in which, the sons of iniquity, stoned him to death.
Murder with God's help?!

What about robbery with God's help?

The days were the days of Passover and Aristobulus and his party turned to Hyrcanus who was sorry for them and begged him to transfer to them animals for sacrifice. Horcanus' answer was - please, but pay a thousand drachmas for each head (and remind us that one drachma was the average daily wage of a laborer). Aristobulus and the priests robbed him of the requested sum, except that Hyrcanus and his men did not deliver the animals of the money change.
The priests, seething with rage and insult, prayed to God to pay the robbers as their reward. And this time, unlike the last time, which was two-sided, their prayer was answered "and God did not delay their punishment, but sent a great and strong wind and destroyed the grain of the whole land, until a bushel of grain increased at that hour by eleven drachmas" (Yosef ben Matthiyahu, The Jewish Antiquities , hand, 28).

Was it or wasn't it, it doesn't matter, and even if it is a mythological story that may have stemmed from wishful thinking or even a random drought, on which the thousand-night-and-night series was built. Nor can we rule out the possibility that Yosef ben Mattiyahu, the author of the book, being a member of a respectable priestly family, sought to be redeemed from the robbers.

And in our case - it was not the quarrel between the brothers and the insulting and despicable acts that brought about the Roman occupation. The conquest was expected in light of the empire's lines of progress from west to east. And lest you say, perhaps the occupation was accelerated under the circumstances of the fraternal feud? But here, too, the pages of history slap the faces of those who hold this view. Pompey vacates control of Judea after the defeat of the Armenian forces and the Pontus area and following the conquest of Syria between 66 and 64 BC. And remind ourselves geopolitically - taking over Syria means appropriating all the territories it had, including Judah (since the beginning of the Hellenistic period and through the Maccabeans and Hasmoneans). Judah was not at all independent during the Maccabean and Hasmonean times, and even the declaration of sovereignty during the times of Alexander Yanai and his successor Shlomzion was not approved by the Syrian-Seleucid kingdom.

But May? Over time, with the intention of glorifying and strengthening the Jewish heroism, courage and determination in the face of all those who "rise up against us" on the one hand and at the same time explain the weakness of the link in the chain of the people's sanctity on the other hand, many "good" people distorted the historical situation - delete there, smear there... And they created the myth of sibling rivalry, or if you want the myth of "hate for nothing", which runs in our districts to this very day, as if everything is fine and only the non-conformists are the foxes who terrorize the vineyards. And by the way, a complete waste!

for all episodes of the series