Towards the end of the Hasmonean dynasty, a change in the status of the priesthood begins, with its transfer to the Pharisees due to the fact that Shlomzion, who inherited the monarchy, could not serve as high priestess
On the eve of his death, Alexandros Yanai swore to his wife Shlomzion Alexandra to compromise with the Pharisees, but did not advise on the extent of the rule that would pass into her hands. In any case, it was clear that Alexandra would not be able to serve as high priestess and therefore she passed the scepter of the priesthood to her eldest son Yohanan Hyrcanus II. The aforementioned position and title was almost emptied of all status and power because Shlomzion placed the management of society in the hands of the Pharisees and demanded that the people obey them. The younger son Yehuda Aristobulus II, who was vigorous and ambitious, was given a limited military command and sent to some campaign in Damascus, probably also to keep him out of the political arena.
Yosef ben Matatiyo says that "Alexandra appointed Hyrcanus as high priest because of his age, but more than that because of his weakness, and gave permission to the Pharisees to engage in everything" (Kadmoniot 408, XNUMX). "Due to his age", is it because he is the eldest, or is it because of his age, which can actually indicate weakness. Hyrcanus' weakness was in any case due to his weak nature, from his lack of a personal, immanent backbone.
This step of Shlomzion was supposed to be, or its result was - to turn the wheel back - to gradually cancel the Matatiyo revolution and return the crown of the great priesthood to its former place, to its traditional home. On the other hand, the empowerment of the Pharisee status narrowed the priestly status.
When Shlomzion Alexandra died, she was succeeded by Hyrcanus, her eldest son, and the royal crown was placed on his head. But the rebellion of Aristobulus in him led to the relinquishment of the monarchy on his behalf and retirement to his house and most of his possessions.
The aspiration to return and rule was ignited in the heart of Hyrcanus by the defeated and weak Antipater the Redeemer, who had the opportunity, since the forced conversion of his ancestors by Hyrcanus the grandfather, to bring about a revolution in Jerusalem and Judea together with Harat, the leader of the Arab tribes.
In the conflict that broke out between Hyrcanus and his brother Aristobulus, the majority of the people joined Hyrcanus, while the priests joined Aristobulus' camp for purely pragmatic considerations and those that pointed to the exhaustion of Hyrcanus' hand, even though he functioned as high priest.
When the brothers brought their claims to Pompey, the senior Roman commander in Syria, the claim of the people's representatives was heard echoing, probably from the Sanhedrin. These affirmed that indeed the Hasmoneans are of priestly descent, but the purpose of their struggle is political, and has nothing to do with strengthening the priesthood or anything. This statement was meant to criticize the purity of the priesthood of the Hasmonean house and it joins the criticism against the picture of the priestly situation drawn during the days of the Hasmonean house.
After Pompey entered the temple and defiled it against his will and without his knowledge, he ordered it to be purified again, to renew the work of sacrifices, and to return the high priesthood to Hyrcanus "as a reward for the benefit he brought him in general and because he dissuaded the Jews in the land from fighting together with Aristobulus" according to the testimony of Josephus ben Mattathias (The Antiquities of the Jews vol. 73), including the oversight of the temple.
Yosef ben Matthew cannot help himself. His anger burns in him to corrupt, and when he describes the loss of Judah's certain independence to the Romans, the result of a fraternal feud, he deviates from his historiosophical, objective approach, and pours out his heart to the reader as follows: "This disaster (the loss of freedom) was caused to Jerusalem by Hyrcanus and Aristobulus in their quarrel with This ... and the rule of the monarchy, which was previously given to the family of high priests, became a servant of honor to people from among the people" (ibid. 78-77).
When Crassus, one of the three triumvirs, the rulers of Rome, went out to fight the Parthians, Rome's stubborn enemies, he sought to use money that Pompey had left in the temple in the amount of 2000 lokas and in addition to that another 8000 lokas and another load of gold ingots worth a lot - 200 mana. The ingot was given to him by the treasurer of the temple, a priest named Elazar. Eleazar guarded the temple's scrolls, which were very valuable, and when he noticed Crassus and his intentions and feared that God would empty the temple's treasures, he gave him the above-mentioned ingot in exchange for everything he asked for. The event ended in bitter disappointment, because Crassus, the ardent lover of gold, finally took it all.
Yosef ben Matthew confesses immediately afterwards in this way: "And let not a man who had such wealth in our temple be astonished, for all the Jews in the world and the worshipers of God (!!!), even from Asia and Europe, had bequeathed money to him for many years" (ibid., 110 ).The temple served as a place to store donation money and a base for investments (a kind of bank) and its wealth was unprecedented. No wonder, then, that many figures throughout the history of the people of Israel fought hard to obtain the office of the greater priesthood from one another and to strengthen their hold on the title from one another.
Shortly after, the first triumvirate war took place and one of the triumvirs, Julius Caesar, found himself in trouble in Egypt. The one who helped him was Antipater the Redeemer who mobilized three thousand foot soldiers for him, while the high priest in Jerusalem sent letters in a hurry to the Jewish warriors in the land of Hanio so that they would support the emperor and his men and provide them with any assistance they might need. The connection between the high priest and his land is interesting, because that is where the Jewish temple was built in Egypt, in Leontopolis, as a protest against the priestly revolution carried out by Matthias of Modiim. The connection between the two temples is very interesting and suggests an attempt to return the crown to its former glory.
In any case, after Caesar won the battle, he rewarded Hyrcanus by appointing him high priest, adding to him the status of governor of the people. Some claim, like the Greco-Roman historian Strabo, that Hyrcanus was not satisfied with sending the above letters, but himself went down to Egypt to participate in the war campaign together with Julius Caesar.
The special relationship with Julius Caesar greatly upgraded the status of Hyrcanus, and he was respected and prestigious by the Athenian Damos, as evidenced by a letter sent to Hyrcanus by the Athenian citizens' assembly, led by the priest Dionysius son of Askapiliades. In this letter, Hyrcanus is presented as the friend of the Athenian people and he is offered a wreath of gold of a different size, as well as a promise that his copper icon (his statue) will be placed in the Athenian temple in an elegant ceremony on the Dionysian holiday and to praise the character and contributions of Hyrcanus in the various sports games.
Hyrcanus' path towards total control would have been really smooth if it had not been neutralized by Antipater who was appointed by the Romans as the epitropus of Judea, that is - its acting governor. Sound problematic? Not so from the point of view of the Romans, who on many occasions used the divide-and-rule method - between Hyrcanus and Antipater.
Antipater immediately noticed the political and personal weakness of Hyrcanus in general, and therefore hastened to appoint his sons as governors. Petzal was entrusted with Jerusalem and its surroundings and Herod with the Galilee. The position of Hyrcanus therefore gradually evaporated.
The series of articles "The Priesthood You Didn't Know" by Dr. Yehiam Sorek
11 תגובות
Shlomzion-Today: "Jerusalem Day".
If we summarize the gist of your words and the essence of your intention (as I understand it), you believe that the 'Temple' was used from that time until now, from the physical and metaphysical point of view, as a sort of 'treasure bank' of the powers of all believers in the 'heart of Jerusalem' body and therefore the 'priests' (incumbent-politicians) continued to own him/her and played with the capital and dynasties of the 'monarchs' (guardians of the core embers) for purposes of control.
incidentally,
Not long ago, a film was screened at Cinematheque "The Drinking Stone" as a comprehensive investigation of the Jerusalem 'syndrome' and its consequences.
Is in Jerusalem after all North as 'Zion' the code for 'Shelem'?
On the eve of his death, Alexandros Yanai swore to his wife Shlomzion Alexandra to compromise with the Pharisees, but did not advise on the extent of the rule that would pass into her hands. In any case, it was clear that Alexandra would not be able to serve as high priestess and therefore she passed the scepter of the priesthood to her eldest son Yohanan Hyrcanus II. The aforementioned position and title was almost emptied of all status and power because Shlomzion entrusted the running of the society to the Pharisees and demanded that the people obey them. The younger son Yehuda Aristobulus II, who was vigorous and ambitious, was given a limited military command and was sent to some campaign in Damascus, probably also to keep him out of the political arena.
Joseph ben Mattheiyahu says that "Alexandra appointed Hyrcanus as high priest because of his age, but more than that because of his weakness, and gave permission to the Pharisees to engage in everything" (Kedmoniot 408, XNUMX). "Due to his age", is it because he is the eldest, or is it because of his age, which can actually indicate weakness. Hyrcanus' weakness was in any case due to his weak nature, from his lack of a personal, immanent backbone.
This step of Shlomzion was supposed to be, or its result was - to turn the wheel back - to gradually cancel the Matatiyo revolution and return the crown of the great priesthood to its former place, to its traditional home. On the other hand, the empowerment of the Pharisee status narrowed the priestly status.
When Shlomzion Alexandra died, she was succeeded by Hyrcanus, her eldest son, and the royal crown was placed on his head. But the rebellion of Aristobulus in him led to the relinquishment of the monarchy on his behalf and retirement to his house and most of his possessions.
The aspiration to return and rule was ignited in the heart of Hyrcanus by the defeated and weak Antipater the Redeemer, who had the opportunity, since the forced conversion of his ancestors by Hyrcanus the grandfather, to bring about a revolution in Jerusalem and Judea together with Harat, the leader of the Arab tribes.
In the conflict that broke out between Hyrcanus and his brother Aristobulus, the majority of the people joined Hyrcanus, while the priests joined Aristobulus' camp for purely pragmatic considerations and those that pointed to the exhaustion of Hyrcanus' hand, even though he functioned as high priest.
When the brothers brought their claims to Pompey, the senior Roman commander in Syria, the claim of the people's representatives was heard echoing, probably from the Sanhedrin. These affirmed that indeed the Hasmoneans are of priestly descent, but the purpose of their struggle is political, and has nothing to do with strengthening the priesthood or anything. This statement was meant to criticize the purity of the priesthood of the Hasmonean house and it joins the criticism against the picture of the priestly situation drawn during the days of the Hasmonean house.
After Pompey entered the temple and defiled it against his will and without his knowledge, he ordered it to be purified again, to renew the work of sacrifices, and to return the high priesthood to Hyrcanus "as a reward for the benefit he brought him in general and because he dissuaded the Jews in the land from fighting together with Aristobulus" according to the testimony of Josephus ben Mattathias (The Antiquities of the Jews vol. 73), including the oversight of the Temple.
Yosef ben Matthew cannot help himself. His anger burns in him to corrupt, and when he describes the loss of Judah's certain independence to the Romans, the result of the fraternal feud, he deviates from his historiosophical, objective approach, and pours out his heart to the reader as follows: "This disaster (the loss of freedom) was caused to Jerusalem by Hyrcanus and Aristobulus in their quarrel with This ... and the rule of the monarchy, which was previously given to a family of high priests, became a servant of honor to people from among the people" (ibid. 78-77).
When Crassus, one of the three triumvirs, the rulers of Rome, went out to fight the Parthians, Rome's stubborn enemies, he sought to use money that Pompey had left in the temple in the amount of 2000 lokas and in addition to that another 8000 lokas and another load of gold ingots worth a lot - 200 mana. The ingot was given to him by the treasurer of the temple, a priest named Elazar. Eleazar guarded the temple's paraphernalia, which were very valuable, and when he noticed Crassus and his intentions and feared that God would empty the temple's treasures, he gave him the above-mentioned bullion in exchange for everything he asked for. The event ended in bitter disappointment, because Crassus, the ardent lover of gold, finally took everything.
Yosef ben Matthew confesses immediately afterwards in this way: "And let not a man who had such wealth in our temple be astonished, for all the Jews in the world and the worshipers of God (!!!), even from Asia and Europe, have been donating money to him for many years" (ibid., 110 ).The temple served as a place to store donation money and a base for investments (a kind of bank) and its wealth was unprecedented. No wonder, then, that many figures throughout the history of the people of Israel fought hard to obtain the office of the greater priesthood from one another and to strengthen their hold on the title from one another.
Shortly after, the first triumvirate war took place and one of the triumvirs, Julius Caesar, found himself in trouble in Egypt. The one who helped him was Antipater the Redeemer who mobilized three thousand foot soldiers for him, while the high priest in Jerusalem sent letters in a hurry to the Jewish warriors in the land of Hanio so that they would support the emperor and his men and provide them with any assistance they might need. The connection between the high priest and his land is interesting, because that is where the Jewish temple was built in Egypt, in Leontopolis, as a protest against the priestly revolution carried out by Matthias of Modiim. The connection between the two temples is very interesting and suggests an attempt to return the crown to its former glory.
In any case, after Caesar won the battle, he rewarded Hyrcanus by appointing him high priest, adding to him the status of governor of the people. Some claim, like the Greco-Roman historian Strabo, that Hyrcanus was not satisfied with sending the above letters, but himself went down to Egypt to participate in the war campaign together with Julius Caesar.
The special relationship with Julius Caesar greatly upgraded the status of Hyrcanus, and he was respected and prestigious by the Athenian Damos, as evidenced by a letter sent to Hyrcanus by the Athenian citizens' assembly, led by the priest Dionysius son of Askapiliades. In this letter, Hyrcanus is presented as the friend of the Athenian people and he is offered a wreath of gold of a different size, as well as a promise that his copper icon (his statue) will be placed in the Athenian temple in an elegant ceremony on the Dionysian holiday and to praise the character and contributions of Hyrcanus in the various sports games.
Hyrcanus' path towards total control would have been really smooth if it had not been neutralized by Antipater who was appointed by the Romans as the epitropus of Judea, that is - its acting governor. Sound problematic? Not so from the point of view of the Romans, who on many occasions used the divide-and-rule method - between Hyrcanus and Antipater.
Antipater immediately noticed the political and personal weakness of Hyrcanus in general, and therefore hastened to appoint his sons as governors. Petzal was entrusted with Jerusalem and its surroundings and Herod with the Galilee. The position of Hyrcanus therefore gradually evaporated.
On the eve of his death, Alexandros Yanai swore to his wife Shlomzion Alexandra to compromise with the Pharisees, but did not advise on the extent of the rule that would pass into her hands. In any case, it was clear that Alexandra would not be able to serve as high priestess and therefore she passed the scepter of the priesthood to her eldest son Yohanan Hyrcanus II. The aforementioned position and title was almost emptied of all status and power because Shlomzion entrusted the running of the society to the Pharisees and demanded that the people obey them. The younger son Yehuda Aristobulus II, who was vigorous and ambitious, was given a limited military command and was sent to some campaign in Damascus, probably also to keep him out of the political arena.
Joseph ben Mattheiyahu says that "Alexandra appointed Hyrcanus as high priest because of his age, but more than that because of his weakness, and gave permission to the Pharisees to engage in everything" (Kedmoniot 408, XNUMX). "Due to his age", is it because he is the eldest, or is it because of his age, which can actually indicate weakness. Hyrcanus' weakness was in any case due to his weak nature, from his lack of a personal, immanent backbone.
This step of Shlomzion was supposed to be, or its result was - to turn the wheel back - to gradually cancel the Matatiyo revolution and return the crown of the great priesthood to its former place, to its traditional home. On the other hand, the empowerment of the Pharisee status narrowed the priestly status.
When Shlomzion Alexandra died, she was succeeded by Hyrcanus, her eldest son, and the royal crown was placed on his head. But the rebellion of Aristobulus in him led to the relinquishment of the monarchy on his behalf and retirement to his house and most of his possessions.
The aspiration to return and rule was ignited in the heart of Hyrcanus by the defeated and weak Antipater the Redeemer, who had the opportunity, since the forced conversion of his ancestors by Hyrcanus the grandfather, to bring about a revolution in Jerusalem and Judea together with Harat, the leader of the Arab tribes.
In the conflict that broke out between Hyrcanus and his brother Aristobulus, the majority of the people joined Hyrcanus, while the priests joined Aristobulus' camp for purely pragmatic considerations and those that pointed to the exhaustion of Hyrcanus' hand, even though he functioned as high priest.
When the brothers brought their claims to Pompey, the senior Roman commander in Syria, the claim of the people's representatives was heard echoing, probably from the Sanhedrin. These affirmed that indeed the Hasmoneans are of priestly descent, but the purpose of their struggle is political, and has nothing to do with strengthening the priesthood or anything. This statement was meant to criticize the purity of the priesthood of the Hasmonean house and it joins the criticism against the picture of the priestly situation drawn during the days of the Hasmonean house.
After Pompey entered the temple and defiled it against his will and without his knowledge, he ordered it to be purified again, to renew the work of sacrifices, and to return the high priesthood to Hyrcanus "as a reward for the benefit he brought him in general and because he dissuaded the Jews in the land from fighting together with Aristobulus" according to the testimony of Josephus ben Mattathias (The Antiquities of the Jews vol. 73), including the oversight of the Temple.
Yosef ben Matthew cannot help himself. His anger burns in him to corrupt, and when he describes the loss of Judah's certain independence to the Romans, the result of the fraternal feud, he deviates from his historiosophical, objective approach, and pours out his heart to the reader as follows: "This disaster (the loss of freedom) was caused to Jerusalem by Hyrcanus and Aristobulus in their quarrel with This ... and the rule of the monarchy, which was previously given to a family of high priests, became a servant of honor to people from among the people" (ibid. 78-77).
When Crassus, one of the three triumvirs, the rulers of Rome, went out to fight the Parthians, Rome's stubborn enemies, he sought to use money that Pompey had left in the temple in the amount of 2000 lokas and in addition to that another 8000 lokas and another load of gold ingots worth a lot - 200 mana. The ingot was given to him by the treasurer of the temple, a priest named Elazar. Eleazar guarded the temple's paraphernalia, which were very valuable, and when he noticed Crassus and his intentions and feared that God would empty the temple's treasures, he gave him the above-mentioned bullion in exchange for everything he asked for. The event ended in bitter disappointment, because Crassus, the ardent lover of gold, finally took everything.
Yosef ben Matthew confesses immediately afterwards in this way: "And let not a man who had such wealth in our temple be astonished, for all the Jews in the world and the worshipers of God (!!!), even from Asia and Europe, have been donating money to him for many years" (ibid., 110 ).The temple served as a place to store donation money and a base for investments (a kind of bank) and its wealth was unprecedented. No wonder, then, that many figures throughout the history of the people of Israel fought hard to obtain the office of the greater priesthood from one another and to strengthen their hold on the title from one another.
Shortly after, the first triumvirate war took place and one of the triumvirs, Julius Caesar, found himself in trouble in Egypt. The one who helped him was Antipater the Redeemer who mobilized three thousand foot soldiers for him, while the high priest in Jerusalem sent letters in a hurry to the Jewish warriors in the land of Hanio so that they would support the emperor and his men and provide them with any assistance they might need. The connection between the high priest and his land is interesting, because that is where the Jewish temple was built in Egypt, in Leontopolis, as a protest against the priestly revolution carried out by Matthias of Modiim. The connection between the two temples is very interesting and suggests an attempt to return the crown to its former glory.
In any case, after Caesar won the battle, he rewarded Hyrcanus by appointing him high priest, adding to him the status of governor of the people. Some claim, like the Greco-Roman historian Strabo, that Hyrcanus was not satisfied with sending the above letters, but himself went down to Egypt to participate in the war campaign together with Julius Caesar.
The special relationship with Julius Caesar greatly upgraded the status of Hyrcanus, and he was respected and prestigious by the Athenian Damos, as evidenced by a letter sent to Hyrcanus by the Athenian citizens' assembly, led by the priest Dionysius son of Askapiliades. In this letter, Hyrcanus is presented as the friend of the Athenian people and he is offered a wreath of gold of a different size, as well as a promise that his copper icon (his statue) will be placed in the Athenian temple in an elegant ceremony on the Dionysian holiday and to praise the character and contributions of Hyrcanus in the various sports games.
Hyrcanus' path towards total control would have been really smooth if it had not been neutralized by Antipater who was appointed by the Romans as the epitropus of Judea, that is - its acting governor. Sound problematic? Not so from the point of view of the Romans, who on many occasions used the divide-and-rule method - between Hyrcanus and Antipater.
Antipater immediately noticed the political and personal weakness of Hyrcanus in general, and therefore hastened to appoint his sons as governors. Petzal was entrusted with Jerusalem and its surroundings and Herod with the Galilee. The position of Hyrcanus therefore gradually evaporated.
From the reflections of Josephus (Josephus Flavius):
Seven fateful events for his people, his acquaintances and friends, in particular while writing his books, he has and used to ponder, how did it all start and why did it have to end differently than expected?
His thoughts led him to the time of Rehoboam and the dissolution of the united kingdom of Israel, to the fateful events that followed, which included wars between the two kingdoms: Israel and Judah, making alliances with Assyria and Judah in the conflicts between the two kingdoms; And all this when the Assyrians renounced a royal dynasty and became powerful (in the time of Paul, who called himself Teglath the Third, and was not associated with a royal dynasty), and later, when the Athenians began to develop democracy and became powerful, and all this continued until his time, in which he evolved into a situation he never failed to reach, between The rest after the usurpation of the Roman system - the Saint, who was able to perfect a governing system (from the Athenian democracy, and others), after he began to empower Rome; His rights were usurped by emperors, most of whom are murderers and greedy.
And Josephus Flavius (sorry: Joseph ben Mattheyo), began to reflect more deeply on the question: And what happened to us?
To Dr. Yahyam Sorek, thank you for all the "historiosophical" summary articles that you submitted.
I liked the word.
Hugin