a brief history of the intertestamental period

LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE INTERTESTAMENTAL PERIOD

A PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. CARL DIEMER

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

THE COURSE NBST 521

BY

JUSTIN OWENS

LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA

MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2009

Contents

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………… 1

The Grecian or Hellenistic Period…………………………………………………………….. 1

The Ptolemaic Period…………………………………………………………………………. 4

The Seleucid or Syrian Period………………………………………………………………... 6

Antiochus IV Epiphanes………………………………………………………………. 7

The Maccabean Period………………………………………………………………………. 11

The Hasmonean Period……………………………………………………………………….13

The Roman Period through Herod’s Sons…………………………………………………… 17

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………… 21

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………. 22

1

Introduction

From the period of Alexander the Great through the reign of Herod the Great and his

sons, many changes and events took place in Palestine. This period of time covers over three

hundred and thirty years and covers the vast majority of the Intertestamental period. Six

historical divisions are observable that occur after the period of the Persians. The Grecian or

Hellenistic period began with Alexander the Great and his defeat of the Persians at the battle of

Arbela in 331 BC. The Ptolemaic period continues after the Grecian period with the death of

Alexander the Great. The Syrian period was ushered in with the defeat of the Ptolemies in 198

BC at the battle of Panion. The Maccabean period begins in 167 BC with a revolt against the

Syrians. The Hasmonean period is actually a continuation of the Maccabean period but with its

rulers having different agendas than their forefathers.1 The final period is the Roman period

which begins in 63 BC. This study will seek to present the events of each period chronologically

with attention given to the historical and the religious developments of each period in relation to

Palestine as well as describe how Antiochus IV Epiphanes affected the first century world of the

New Testament.

The Grecian or Hellenistic Period (331-320 BC)

―Hellenism‖ is a term used to describe the period of and culture stemming from the

conquests of Alexander the Great.2 Alexander the Great (336-323 BC) was the son of Philip of

Macedon who became king of Greece by force through the rousing of the Macedonian tribes in

northern Greece. Philip had forged Macedonia into a mighty military machine. During his

lifetime he made the Greek city-states the tributaries of Macedonia, and was on the verge of

1Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black, The New Testament: Its Background and Message, (Tennessee:

Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 19.

2J. Julius Scott Jr., Jewish Backgrounds of the New Testament, (Michigan: Baker Academic, 1995),78.

2

additional conquests when he died in 337 BC.3 Alexander succeeded Philip as king upon his

death and, in the year 334 BC, he set out on his career of conquest.4 Alexander looked eastward

to the vast areas controlled by the Greeks’ ancient enemy, the Persians. Leading his army, he

crossed the Hellespont and defeated the Persians at the strategic Granicus River. This victory

opened up the entire region of Asia Minor to him.5 The following year, at Issus, Alexander met

and defeated the Persian king Darius III Codomannus (336-330 BC).6 Alexander was then faced

with a choice. He could either go east or south. Alexander advanced southward and gained

Phoenicia, Palestine and Egypt.

Tradition states that he spared the city of Jerusalem because Jaddua, the high priest,

showed him out of the prophecy of Daniel 8 that he would conquer Persia. Whether this

tradition is historically correct is difficult to determine, but it is a fact that Jerusalem was not

destroyed even though other conquered cities were.7 Josephus recounts this encounter with

Alexander in The Antiquities of the Jews and how when Alexander approached the city of

Jerusalem, he saw a multitude in white clothing and the high priest clothed in fine linen. He

decided to treat the Jews kindly because of a dream that he had at Dios in Macedonia from God

that He would be with Alexander and that he would conquer the Persians. So after making

sacrifice to God according to the high priest’s instruction, Alexander was shown the Danie l

prophecy of a Greek who would conquer the Persians. Alexander supposed that it was he

himself who was this person intended. The next day the high priest asked if the Jews would be

3Lea and Black, 13.

4Scott, 79.

5Robert G. Gromacki, New Testament Survey, (Michigan: Baker Book House, 1974), 5.

6Scott, 79.

7Gromacki, 7.

3

allowed to enjoy the laws of their forefathers and pay no tribute on the seventh year. Alexander

granted the request and also made it so for all of the Jews in Media and Babylon.8 Alexander

then retraced his steps northward, moved east, and conquered the Persians for the third time in

the decisive battle of Arbela. This victory opened up the Persian heartland. His army then

quickly moved through Babylon and Persia and extended itself as far as India.9

The Greek philosopher Aristotle had tutored Alexander in the ideals of Hellenism, and

Alexander developed a deep devotion to Hellenistic culture and tradition. As he conquered, he

established colonies that became centers for spreading Hellenism. Alexander encouraged his

soldiers to marry oriental women, thus enhancing the blending of Greek and oriental cultures.

He also educated Persians in the Greek language.10

Alexander’s greatest desire was to found a

worldwide empire united by language, custom, and civilization. Under his influence the world

began to speak and study the Greek language. Hellenism became so popular that it persisted and

was encouraged even into New Testament times by the Romans. The struggle that developed

between the Jews and Hellenism’s influence upon their culture and religion was long and bitter.

The most faithful of Jews staunchly resisted pagan polytheism.11

When Alexander’s troops became restless, he turned back westward and began suffering

losses. In 323 BC, while laying plans for future expeditions, he suddenly died of fever in

Babylon at the age of thirty-three.12

When Alexander died, he left no heir old enough to take

over the empire. Even with no heir Alexander had passed the legacy of Hellenism on to the next

8Flavius Josephus, The Works of Josephus (Electronic Edition): The Antiquities of the Jews (Iowa: Parsons

Technology, 1998), 11.8.5.

9Gromacki, 7.

10Lea and Black, 13.

11William McDonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary, (Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), 1186.

12Scott, 79.

4

rulers of the area—the Ptolemaic and the Seleucid empire13

—and its influence would continue to

spread throughout the world for the next six hundred years.14

The Ptolemaic Period (320-198 BC)

After seven years of internal struggle, Alexander’s conquered territory was divided into

four sections under the control of four generals called the diadochi which is a derivation of the

Greek word meaning ―successors‖: Antigonus took northern Syria and Babylon; Cassander ruled

Macedonia; Ptolemy controlled southern Syria and Egypt; and Lysimachus reigned over Thrace

and western Asia Minor. When Antigonus attempted to become a second Alexander, the other

three generals aligned to check him. Ptolemy demanded that Antigonus yield Babylon to

Seleucus. When Antigonus resisted, he was defeated and Seleucus obtained Babylon by force.15

Two of these generals developed empires that are important for New Testament history. In

Egypt and southern Syria the Ptolemies ruled and established Alexandria as their capital. In

northern Syria the rulers carried the name of either Seleucus or Antiochus. They made Antioch

their capital. Ptolemy annexed Palestine to his territory ahead of Seleucus and, as a result, led to

Ptolemy and Seleucus becoming bitter enemies. Their descendants continued that hostility and

engaged in many wars, with Palestine being the battlefield and prize of victory.16

Early in the period, Ptolemy I (323-285 BC) settled many Jews in Alexandria. They

became the nucleus of the Jewish community, which constituted one of the city’s five wards and

was to play an important part in history of succeeding centuries (the biblical Apollos came from

13Lea and Black, 13, 15.

14Gromacki, 7.

15Ibid., 8.

16Ibid.

5

Alexandria [Acts 18:24-28]).17

These new immigrants fell fully under the influence of

Hellenistic culture. Hellenism also flowed into Palestine itself through the influence of Greek

cities in the area and trade between Palestine and Egypt. In 320 BC, Ptolemy I deposed the

governor of Palestine and added its territory to his kingdom.18

The absorption of the Grecian

culture by a great number of Jews necessitated the translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into

the Greek language.19

Under Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285-246 BC), the Old Testament was

translated into Greek. The appearance of this translation indicated that Jewish residents in Egypt

were becoming more proficient in the use of Greek than in the use of their native Hebrew.

Jewish tradition taught that this translation was the work of seventy-two Jewish scholars. The

translation, known as the Septuagint, is commonly designated by the Roman numerals LXX,

since seventy is the nearest round number to seventy-two.20

In the New Testament period, it was

widely circulated throughout the Mediterranean world, used in the synagogues by both Jews and

Gentile proselytes. Therefore, when the early churches, composed mostly of Gentile Christians,

were established, they had the authoritative text of the Old Testament in a language they could

read immediately. Before the writing of the Gospels and the Epistles, it was the Bible of the

young church.21

There is little information about affairs in Judea while it lay under Egyptian rule. Two

families, the Oniads and the Tobiads, struggled for both political influence and control of the

priesthood, a conflict which increased in significance in the following period. The Zeno Papyri

17Scott, 80.


19Gromacki, 8.


21Gromacki, 9.

6

attest that Hellenistic culture was widespread in the Jewish countryside outside Jerusalem.22

Also during this period, the many battles between the Ptolemies and Seleucids were constantly

fought. In 198 BC, at Paneas, near the foot of Mt. Hermon in northern Palestine, Antiochus III

of Syria decisively defeated Ptolemy V of Egypt. After this battle, control of Palestine passed

from Egyptian to Syrian hands.23

The Seleucid or Syrian Period (198-167 BC)

With the arrival of the second century BC came also the passing of political power in the

land of Israel from the Ptolemies to the Seleucids (often called Syrians). Both ideological

reasons and practical political considerations prompted the Seleucids to forcefully accelerate the

insertion of Hellenistic culture into all aspects of Jewish life.24

The capital of the Seleucid

empire was Antioch on the Orontes River in northern Syria. This city was destined to become

the first major non-Jewish center of Christianity (Acts 11:19-26) and the headquarters from

where Paul left for his missionary journeys. In 198 BC Antiochus III the Great (223-187 BC)

defeated Ptolemy V Epiphanes (203-181 BC) at Paneas (later Caesarea Philippi) near the

headwaters of the Jordan River. Some Jews welcomed Seleucid control. Antiochus confirmed

Jewish privileges, reduced tribute, and made contributions to the temple.25

Roman political influence first began to be felt in the East during this time. When

Hannibal of Carthage was defeated by the Romans in 202 BC, he fled eastward and took refuge

in the court of Antiochus III. Full of vengeance, Hannibal encouraged Antiochus to invade

Greece to gain more territory. Rome interfered, defeated Antiochus, forced him to withdraw and

22Scott, 80.


24Scott, 80.

25Ibid., 81.

7

took his son as a political hostage to Rome. Twelve years later the son, Antiochus IV Epiphanes,

was released, returned to Syria, and shortly after was crowned king.26

ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES

Even though many Jews welcomed the Seleucids, there was still opposition. Many Jews,

led by the high priest Onias III, supported the Ptolemies of Egypt. Their opponents from the

wealthy house of Tobias supported Syria. For some years a struggle ensued between the pro-

Egyptian Oniads and the pro-Syrian Tobiads. The Oniads initially prevailed over the Tobiads,

and their dominance continued until the Syrian ruler Antiochus IV (175-163 BC) came to the

throne. Antiochus was a committed Hellenist and an egoist. He assumed the name ―Epiphanes,‖

meaning ―Manifestation of God,‖ suggesting that he was the incarnation of the Olympian Zeus

on earth. In a mocking twist of irony the Jews dubbed him ―Epimanes,‖ the madman.27

Antiochus IV had two problems to deal with when he came to the throne. On his

southern border Ptolemy VI Philometor (181-145 BC) sought to regain the land of Israel; for his

part Antiochus desired to control Egypt. Also, he was compelled to seek funds with which to

pay a staggering settlement imposed by the Romans when they defeated Antiochus III. Thus, the

tax burden on the Jews became heavier. Antiochus plundered the temple for its gold, and when

the Jews resisted, they suffered military defeat and the slaughter of many of their countrymen.

The walls of Jerusalem were razed, and troops friendly to the king were stationed in the newly

constructed Acra, a Seleucid military stronghold in the city. Most severe of all was Antiochus’s

26Gromacki, 9-10.


8

determination to create a loyal ideological-cultural boundary with Egypt by completely

hellenizing Jewish society.28

Under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, Onias III lost his priestly office to his brother Jason, who

used bribery and the promise (contrary to family policy) to promote Hellenism in Jerusalem.

Jason established a gymnasium with a race track in Jerusalem where Jewish boys exercised in

the nude after the Greek custom. This practice produced outrage among devoted Jews. Races

opened with invocations to pagan deities and Jewish priests even began to leave their duties to

attend these events. Prior to a planned invasion of Egypt, Antiochus replaced Jason with another

Jew, Menelaus, who had offered a higher tribute to Antiochus. Pious Jews deeply resented the

sale of the sacred office of high priest to the highest bidder. As an added offense, Menelaus may

not have belonged to a priestly family.29

Thus important precedents were set that removed the

Zadokite family’s exclusive right to the high priesthood and placed bestowal of the office in the

hands of the ruler. At this point, the written sources first introduce a group called the Hasidim

(Pious Ones). They seemed to have resisted Hellenism. They were appalled at the transfer of

the priesthood from Onias to Jason, horrified when it left the clan of Aaron and particularly the

family of Zadok.30

Antiochus IV's decision to intervene in high-priestly politics, which may be viewed as a

logical extension of his earlier activities, was bound both to worsen Seleucid-Jewish relations

and to exacerbate difficulties among Jews. Here one can again see that financial concerns

dominated his thinking. Antiochus achieved notable victories in his first campaign against a

weakened Ptolemaic empire. Returning triumphantly north from these initial successes, he

28Scott, 81.

29Lea and Black, 16-17.

30Scott, 82.

9

stopped in Jerusalem during the fall of 169 BCE and used this as an opportunity to expropriate

huge sums in gold and silver from the Temple treasury. From the perspective of almost all the

Jewish community, this was an illegal and impious action. From Antiochus's point of view, he

was only helping himself to what was lawfully his, with the active support of the Jewish high

priest Menelaus. Antiochus had high hopes for a repeat performance when he embarked on his

second Egyptian campaign the following year. At first, everything went his way, as he and his

victorious troops marched up the banks of the Nile toward Alexandria. But at that very moment,

as if on cue, a Roman envoy arrived on the scene and demanded that Antiochus immediately halt

his advance and return home.31

The Roman legate, Popilius Laenas, protecting the ambitions of

his government, confronted Antiochus outside Alexandria. He drew a circle on the ground

around him, and demanded his promise to withdraw from Egypt before he stepped out of the

circle. Antiochus, unable to resist the armed might of Rome, grudgingly withdrew from Egypt.32

At one time he is praised for acting truly like a king; yet he had a contempt for court

protocol, and a love of mixing with the common people and sharing their amusements, which

shocked educated Greeks. A bohemian streak appears in his interest in art—particularly that of

the goldsmiths and silversmiths, with whom he spent much of his spare time—and in his delight

in dressing up and play-acting, the most notorious instance of which was his holding ―elections‖

on the Roman model in Antioch, with himself as a candidate for office. But these were minor

matters. More important were the attempts to find compensation for the interview with Popilius.

Much of this effort—such as the splendid triumphal procession on his return from Egypt—was

chiefly directed towards making the Greek world forget his humiliation. This was politically

31Leonard J. Greenspoon, ―Between Alexandria and Antioch,‖ in The Oxford History of the Biblical World,

(2009, accessed 19 November 2009, available from http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/book/obso-

9780195139372/obso-9780195139372-div1-93), Internet.


http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/book/obso-9780195139372/obso-9780195139372-div1-93


10

necessary. But the increasing signs of unbalance in his character show that he himself

desperately needed psychological compensation. His rule now became more arbitrary and his

methods more oppressive, much against his political interest; and, above all, he began to lay

increasing stress on his divinity.33

As a result of this psychological break and his ―divinity‖ complex, Antiochus went to

Jerusalem to defeat an effort by Jason to regain the priesthood. He took Jerusalem; killed large

numbers of men, women, and children; entered the temple; and confiscated the holy vessels and

offerings he found there. He built a strongly fortified citadel on the western hill of Jerusalem,

garrisoned it with troops loyal to him, and left it behind to enforce his victory. Back in Antioch,

he decreed steps for ending Jewish worship in Jerusalem. His purposes had little to do with his

devotion to Hellenistic religion, but he wanted to unify his kingdom on a religious basis and to

control the offerings pouring into the Jerusalem temple. After his decree it became a capital

offense to practice circumcision, observe the Sabbath and other religious festivals, and even to

own copies of portions of the Old Testament. Pagan sacrifices became compulsory in the temple

and at altars throughout the country. Antiochus ordered the erection of a statue of Olympian

Zeus in the temple and even had a sow (pig) sacrificed on the sacred altar.34

Josephus attests to

this account by showing in his Antiquities that, ―when the king had built an idol altar upon God’s

altar, he slew swine upon it, and so offered a sacrifice neither according to the law, nor the

Jewish religious worship in that country.‖35

Antiochus failed to reckon with the stubborn commitment of the Jews to follow their

religion. Many Jews courageously chose martyrdom rather than compromise their faith.

33E. Badian, Antiochus Epiphanes and the Rebirth of Judaea, (History Today, 9:6, 1959:June), 419.


35Josephus, Antiquities, 12.5.4.

11

Courageous survivors of Antiochus’s withering persecution began to prepare themselves for

armed resistance to his despotic decrees. As a result of Antiochus’s cruel decrees a revolt took

place that would have a lasting impact up to and beyond the first century world of the New

Testament. In 167 BC a band of Jews gathering around an aged priest named Mattathias from

the village of Modin, about ten miles northwest of Jerusalem, sparked a revolt against Syrian

power.36

This revolt would continue past Antiochus’ time. Antiochus died in 163 BC but rivalry

and strife among his would-be successors aided the Jews in their quest for freedom.37

This set

the stage for a series of conflicts that would see the end of the Seleucid control over Palestine

and usher in the next period in the nation of Palestine.

The Maccabean Period (167-142 BC)

After Antiochus Epiphanes’ intolerable pollutions of the Jewish temple in 168 BC,

further abuses were heaped upon the Jews. The deplorable conditions reached a pinnacle when a

Syrian official tried to force Mattathias, an old priest, to offer a pagan sacrifice in the village of

Modin. The priest refused and when an apostate Jew volunteered to do so, Mattathias killed him

and the government envoy, destroyed the altar, and fled into the wilderness with his sons. The

priest became a national hero overnight.38

Many others joined them in the mountains to form a

resistance movement that would eventually lead to Jewish independence. Among those joining

were the Hasidim who had fervently resisted outside cultural influences in order to remain


37Ibid., 19.

38Gromacki, 10.

12

faithful to the Torah. Mattathias died in 166 B.C. and the leadership of the rebellion he had

begun fell to his son Judas.39

Judas (164-160 BC) proved to be a nearly invincible military leader. With stealth and

sudden attacks he routed armies of superior numbers sent against him by Antiochus. His exploits

earned him the nickname of Maccabeus, ―the Hammer.‖ The revolutionaries were henceforth

called the Maccabees. The Maccabean family also was called Hasmonean after the name of an

earlier ancestor, Hasmon.40

The unstable international situation kept the Seleucids from devoting

their full energies to crushing the Jewish revolt. Eventually they were forced to withdraw to

regroup their forces.41

In 164 BC, three years after the altar to Zeus had been set up, Judas

wrested religious freedom from the Syrians. Antiochus rescinded his ban on the Jewish religion,

and Judas was able to lead the Jews in the worship of Jehovah. The temple was cleansed, the

daily burnt offering and other religious ceremonies resumed and the temple was re-dedicated.

Modern Jews still commemorate this event in their annual celebration of the Feast of Lights, or

Hanukkah. Although Judas obtained religious freedom, he still sought to win full national

autonomy.42

The Maccabees had won their struggle for religious liberty, but the Seleucids remained

their overlords, Hellenism was still a threat, Menelaus continued as high priest, and Jews outside

Jerusalem and Judea lived in constant danger of attack.43

Judas was killed in battle in 160 BC at

the strategic Beth-horon pass and was succeeded by his brother Jonathan (160-143 BC), a man of

39David C. Carson, A Brief History of the Intertestamental Period and Beyond, (2006, accessed 23

November 2009, available from http://davcarson.home.mindspring.com/Intertestamental//briefhistory.htm), Internet.


41Scott, 83.


43Scott, 83.

http://davcarson.home.mindspring.com/Intertestamental/briefhistory.htm

13

prudence and great skills. He exploited the internal Seleucid situation to great advantage,

succeeding in expanding Jewish-held territory and acquiring virtual independence. Although the

Hasmonean family were ordinary priests rather than from the high-priestly line of Zadok, in 152

BC Jonathan became high priest; the position was to remain in the family until the Roman

occupation. Jonathan was eventually murdered by the Seleucids in 143 BC.44

Jonathan was succeeded by his brother Simon (143-134 BC) and he continued military

and political pressure until 142 BC when a claimant to the Syrian throne offered Simon national

release from tribute and taxation in return for his military and political support. The leader,

Demetrius II Nicator, did not withdraw all Syrian forces from Palestinian soil, but Simon

continued a military struggle and subdued the citadel in Jerusalem that had been established there

by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. From then until the rise of the Roman Empire, the Jews enjoyed

national autonomy. In the period of peace that followed, a grateful Jewish nation recognized the

leadership of Simon and his family. Simon was awarded the office of hereditary high priest, and

the Jewish people vested in him religious, military, and political authority.45

This dual role

(civil-religious) continued and caused the priests to become wealthy, powerful men. This act

legitimized a new dynasty, a hereditary high priesthood that came to be known as the

Hasmoneans.46

The Hasmonean Period (142-63 BC)

In many ways the original hopes of the Maccabean revolt had been realized by 142 BC.

After that time many of the descendants of the Maccabees who served as rulers abandoned the

44Scott, 84.


46Gromacki, 11.

14

aims and goals of their forefathers and pursued personal agendas that were often secular and

influenced by Hellenism.47

Though Simon was able to push back military threats from Syria, he

succumbed to internal strife. In a display of unbelievable treachery, Simon’s son-in-law,

Ptolemy, murdered Simon and two of his sons. A surviving son, John Hyrcanus (134-104 BC),

escaped and repulsed the military effort of Ptolemy.48

Ptolemy had intended to seize leadership

for himself, but Hyrcanus was acclaimed his father’s successor. During the first five or six years

of Hyrcanus’s rule the Seleucids once again invaded and assumed temporary control of the land

of Israel, but by the seventh year the Jews were once again independent. He then set out on a

policy of conquest, using mercenaries as well as Jewish soldiers. He added areas east of the

Jordan, Idumea to the south, and the Samaritan lands as far as Scythopolis (Beth-shan) to the

north. The Idumeans were forced to accept circumcision and to live under the Jewish law.

Hyrcanus destroyed the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim around 108 BC and, later, the city

of Samaria.49

Hyrcanus’s military conquests made him virtually a Jewish king. His cruelty alienated

many godly Jews and pushed Hyrcanus into a reconciliation with wealthy Jews who had

sympathies for Hellenism. During his lifetime one can see the initial development of groups that

later became the Pharisees and the Sadducees of the New Testament period. The Pharisees were

the descendants of the Hasidim who had initially joined with the Maccabean brothers in their

efforts to win Jewish freedom. The Sadducees became the wealthy party with priestly influence

and a love for Hellenism.50

Josephus notes that Hyrcanus at first favored the Pharisees, but


48Ibid., 20.

49Scott, 85.


15

turned to favor the Sadducees when one of the Pharisees named Eleazer, suggested that he give

up the high priesthood and to just be content with being in political and military power.51

From

this time onward, with the sole exception of Salome Alexandra, the Pharisees were enemies of

the Hasmonean dynasty; there grew a strong relationship between the Hasmoneans and the

Sadducees.52

When Hyrcanus died in 104 BC, Aristobulus (104-103 BC) took control. Although he

reigned but a year, he consolidated his power at the cost of imprisoning his closest relatives,

including his mother, whom he allowed to die of starvation. He continued the program of

territorial expansion begun by his father and brought Iturea, in the Lebanese foothills, and

Galilee under Jewish control. Aristobulus also openly claimed the title of king. Josephus notes

that Aristobulus bore another title, Philhellene or ―lover of things Greek.‖53

Upon Aristobulus’s death his widow, Salome Alexandra, released his brothers from

prison and offered herself to one of them, Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 BC). He then became

king and high priest. His devotion to Hellenism is evident in the use of two names, on Greek and

the other Hebrew, and also in his inscribing his coins in the two languages. During the majority

of his rule, he was involved in either foreign or domestic military conflict. Early on he suffered

defeat at the hands of the Egyptians and Nabateans. His relations with the Pharisees deteriorated

to the point that some of their number called in the Seleucid king Demetrius III Eukairos against

him. However, the sight of a Jewish king fleeing from the Seleucids caused his enemies to turn

to his aid, and the Seleucids were expelled. This event marked the turning point in Jannaeus’s

51Josephus, Antiquities, 13.10.5-6.

52Scott, 86.


16

fortunes.54

He retaliated against the Pharisaical conspiracy, and according to Josephus, ―as he

was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered about eight hundred of

them to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and

wives to be cut before their eyes.‖55

This and other acts of atrocity caused eight thousand of his opponents to flee the country.

Thereafter his military campaigns were largely successful. He extended the boundaries of

Jewish-held territory beyond those reached under Hyrcanus. Jannaeus modeled neither the ideals

of the priestly Maccabean movement nor the higher values of Hellenistic culture. He was more

of a hellenized Asian despot. His death left the country badly divided and the kingdom passed to

Salome Alexandra, the widow of both Jannaeus and Aristobulus.56

Salome Alexandra (76-67 BC), who took over control after the death of Jannaeus, had

two sons. Hyrcanus II (63-40 BC), who was a quiet and peaceful man, became high priest. His

brother Aristobulus II (67-63 BC), a more dominant personality and ambitious for power,

became leader of the military forces. In foreign affairs there was little of significance during

Alexandra’s reign. Internally, the old Sadducean-aristocracy coalition was not completely

broken and had the advantage of being closely allied with Aristobulus. In 67 BC the Pharisees,

with the queen’s permission, sought to move against their enemies. For their part, Aristobulus

and his associates were poised not only to defend themselves but also to seize power. At that

point Alexandra died and civil war was inevitable.57

54Scott, 87.


56Scott, 87.

57Ibid., 88.

17

Aristobulus’s forces immediately defeated Hyrcanus. In return for permission to retire

peacefully to his estate, Hyrcanus yielded the high priesthood as well as civil authority to his

brother. The days of the Maccabean/Hasmonean rulers were all but over. Although priests, they

had proved to be as corrupt as any pagan overlord. After Aristobulus had become king,

Antipater, whose father had been appointed governor of the area south of Judea (Idumea) by

Jannaeus, set himself to gain power through the weak Hyrcanus. Eventually he persuaded

Hyrcanus to seek support from the Nabatean king Aretas. With this aid Hyrcanus defeated

Aristobulus, who in 65 BC fled to the temple area and fortified himself against a siege by his

brother and the Nabateans. In the north, the Roman general Pompey had subdued Asia Minor

and Syria. When word came to Pompey’s lieutenant, Scaurus, about the strife in Jerusalem, he

went to the city where both Hyrcanus and Aristobulus sought Roman support. Aristobulus’s

party was successful and the Nabateans were ordered to leave. On their way home, they suffered

a humiliating defeat by Aristobulus and his army. Pompey eventually became suspicious of

Aristobulus’s later activities and turned against him. After another siege and battle centered in

the temple area, on a Sabbath day in 63 BC the temple fortress was breached, Aristobulus’s

forces were defeated, and Jerusalem was claimed by the Romans.58

The Roman Period through Herod’s Sons (63 BC-AD 39)

The beginning of Roman rule in the land of Israel saw a continuation of the internal

conflicts begun in the Maccabean/Hasmonean period. In fact, the same characters who had

brought that era to an end were still involved—Aristobulus II, Hyrcanus II, and the Idumean

Antipater.59

During the events of 63 BC when Rome captured Jerusalem and Aristobulus was

58Scott, 88-89.

59Ibid, 89.

18

defeated, Hyrcanus II was restored to the priestly office. Thus Antipater was introduced to

Jewish political life through Rome and Hyrcanus II. The influence of his family in the politics of

Palestine continued for the next four generations. Antipater actually became the chief counselor

and the real power behind the throne.60

At the death of Pompey, Antipater proved himself a faithful supporter of Julius Caesar,

who bestowed upon Antipater the title of procurator of Judea. Two of Antipater’s sons, Phasael

and Herod, were given authority over Jerusalem and Galilee respectively. After the assassination

of Julius Caesar in 44 BC, Antipater and Herod gave aid to the forces of the conspirators Brutus

and Cassius. By 42 BC when Brutus and Cassius had been defeated by the forces of Octavian

and Mark Antony, Antipater had died by poisoning. Mark Antony conferred on Phasael and

Herod the title of tetrarch along with responsibility of Jewish politics. Antigonus, a surviving

son of Aristobulus II managed to put this in a bad light and gained the support of the Parthians to

lay siege to Jerusalem. Phasael committed suicide before he could be taken, and upon capturing

Jerusalem Antigonus cut off the ears of Hyrcanus (his uncle) so that he would no longer qualify

as High Priest. Herod managed to escape and sought out Antony in Alexandria. In 37 BC, three

years after Antigonus had seized power, Herod retook Jerusalem with the support of the

Romans. Antigonus was executed, and Herod controlled of all of Palestine.61

Theoretically

Herod was an independent monarch, but in fact a puppet of Rome. It is he whom history has

labeled King Herod and Herod the Great. The execution of Antigonus ended the Hasmonean

dynasty.62

60Gromacki, 12.

61Carson, Internet.

62Scott, 89.

19

Herod the Great’s non-Jewish background caused most Jews to resent his presence. His

capacity for scheming, cruel behavior appears in the biblical story of his slaughter of the children

in Bethlehem. Despite his cruelty and suspicious attitude, Herod had excellent administrative

abilities. He provided free grain during famine and free clothing in other calamities. He

constructed many impressive buildings and was also responsible for refurbishing of the Jewish

temple. The temple was redecorated with white marble, gold, and jewels and became renowned

for its splendor and lavish appearance.63

Even though Herod was sensitive to Jewish concerns and usually went out of his way not

to offend, he was at heart thoroughly Hellenistic.64

He hated the Hasmonean family and killed

every descendant of the Hasmoneans, even his own wife Marianne, the grand-daughter of John

Hyrcanus. Then he proceeded to murder his own two sons by Marianne, Aristobulus and

Alexander.65

His death in 4 BC, likely of intestinal cancer, found him haunted by the memory of

the atrocious murders he had committed.66

His personal issues notwithstanding, on the whole he

was an able ruler and his achievements were considerable. In particular, Herod’s friendship and

cooperation with Rome were of real value to the Jews of the land of Israel. Politically he

brought stability and a reasonable amount of prosperity to the region.67

At Herod’s death three of his sons inherited separate parts of his kingdom. Archelaus

became ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. The term ethnarch was used to describe the

ruler over an ethnic group such as the Jews. He served from 4 BC–AD 6, when his distasteful


64Scott, 95.

65McDonald, 1188.


67Scott, 95-96.

20

rule provoked the Jews to ask Augustus to replace him. His reign over Judea led Joseph to take

Mary and Jesus to live in Galilee rather than to Judea. After Archelaus’s banishment from the

Judean throne, the Romans generally ruled Judea through a prefect or proprietor who answered

to the Roman emperor. Pontius Pilate was in the line of these prefects.68

Herod Philip was appointed tetrarch (a general description of subordinate rulers) of

Iturea, Trachonitis, Gaulanitis, Auranitis, and Batanea. He was fair and just in his dealings and

served in this position from 4 BC–AD 34. Herod the Great had another son named Philip but

this Philip never ruled over any territory and is know in Scripture only because he was the first

husband of Herodias.69

Herod Antipas was appointed tetrarch of Galilee and Perea and reigned from 4 BC–AD

39. John the Baptist rebuked him for divorcing his wife to marry Herodias, the wife of his half

brother. Jesus labeled him ―that fox‖ and later stood trial before him.70

Antipas carried on the

ambitious building projects, including the cities of Sepphoris and Tiberias. Herod Antipas

seemed to have possessed the less desirable of his father’s qualities but not his ability to rule.

When Caligula became emperor in AD 37, he gave to his friend Agrippa, Herodias’s brother,

both the territory that had until three years earlier been ruled by Philip the tetrarch and the title of

king. Herodias persuaded Antipas to request the same title from the emperor. However, Agrippa

proceeded to bring charges against Antipas of plotting insurrection, which resulted in his being

exiled to Gaul (modern France) in AD 39 accompanied by Herodias.71


69Ibid.

70Ibid.

71Scott, 97.

21

The Hasmonean priesthood that had exercised civil power for one hundred years lost it

when the Herodians came to the throne and never regained it. Although the priests had much

power among the Jewish populace, the iron hand of Rome was there to stay. The constant

jealousy of the Hasmonean priests, the struggle between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and

the intervention of Gentiles (Syrians, Parthians, Idumeans, and Romans) created a genuine spirit

of unrest among the people. They longed for a person to lead them to peace and freedom. Into

this world Jesus came.72

Conclusion

From Alexander the Great up to and through the reign of the Herodians, man’s futile

attempts to deal with the shifting tide of political power and religious belief had produced very

little. Israel was in a kind of spiritual bondage that was even worse than her political bondage.

The rise of the various parties and movements discussed in this study was evidence of a sincere

search for some final solution to her problem. All seemed to have failed. The stage of history

was dark and the situation was indeed desperate. Amid this setting God broke four hundred

years of silence with the announcement of the coming of Christ, the faithful Servant of the Lord,

and the Intertestamental period came to an end.73

72Gromacki, 12-13.

73McDonald, 1189.

22

Bibliography

Badian, E. Antiochus Epiphanes and the Rebirth of Judaea. History Today, 9:6 (1959:June)

pg. 415-423.

Carson, David C. A Brief History of the Intertestamental Period and Beyond. 2006, accessed

23 November 2009; available from

http://davcarson.home.mindspring.com/Intertestamental//briefhistory.htm; Internet.

Greenspoon, Leonard J. ―Between Alexandria and Antioch.‖ The Oxford History of the

Biblical World. Oxford Biblical Studies Online. 2009, accessed 19 November 2009 from

http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/book/obso-9780195139372/obso-

9780195139372-div1-93; Internet.

Gromacki, Robert G. New Testament Survey. Michigan: Baker Book House, 1974.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Josephus (Electronic Edition). Iowa: Parsons Technology,

1998.

Lea, Thomas D., and Black, David Alan. The New Testament: Its Background and Message.

Tennessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003.

McDonald, William. Believer’s Bible Commentary. Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers,

1995.

Scott Jr, J. Julius. Jewish Backgrounds of the New Testament. Michigan: Baker Academic,

1995.

http://davcarson.home.mindspring.com/Intertestamental/briefhistory.htm



a brief history of the intertestamental period

Documents