[ p. 48 ]
A King in Search of a Kingdom .—Herod I, king of Judea and Galilee at the time of Jesus’ birth, has been called “great” to distinguish him from the weak rulers who followed him. He was not, in any sense, one of the greatest men of history. He could not, for instance, be classed with Napoleon the Great, nor with Alexander. Yet his career as an Oriental monarch was in many ways remarkable. Josephus gives a graphic description of his physical strength:
“Now Herod had a body suited to his soul, and was ever a most excellent hunter, where he generally had good success, by the means of his great skill in riding horses; for in one day he caught forty wild beasts: that country breeds also bears and the greatest part of it is replenished with stags and wild asses. He was also such a warrior as could not be withstood; many men, therefore, there are who have stood amazed at his readiness in his exercises, when they saw him throw the javelin directly forward, and shoot the arrow upon the mark. And then besides these performances of his, depending on his own strength of mind and body, fortune was also very favorable to him; for he seldom failed of success in his wars; and when he failed, he was not himself the occasion of such failings, but he either was betrayed by some, or the rashness of his own soldiers procured his defeat” (Josephus,_ The Jewish Wars_ I: 21: 13).
Finally, Herod escaped from the fortress of Masada where he had fled for safety during the Parthian invasion, and made his way at once to the imperial city of Rome. It was his plan [ p. 49 ] to obtain Roman assistance in gaining for himself the Jewish regency, with Aristobulus as king. The journey was fraught with difficulty and danger. But on his arrival Antony recognized the inherent ability of the man. Antony and Octavius decided that Herod was preeminently fitted to preserve peace and to maintain Roman authority in Palestine, so they conferred on him the title of “King of Judea.”
This action placed Herod in the anomalous position of being a “king,” without a kingdom. It was not until 37 B.C. that he entered Jerusalem. In 39 B.c. he returned to Palestine and began to establish himself. From Ptolemais where he disembarked, he proceeded first to Joppa and took the city. He then marched around to the relief of the fortress of Masada, but indifference on the part of the Roman forces which had been provided by Antony to assist him made it impossible for him to lay siege to Jerusalem.
While the Roman generals were resisting the attack of the Parthians in the spring of 38 B.c., Herod subdued the robbers who had been a great danger in Galilee. He ferreted them out of their rocky caves and made the country secure from their depredations. In the summer of 38, after the Roman defeat of the Parthians, Herod presented himself again to Antony, who had come to Samosata, and complained to him of the lack of support from the Roman forces.
Antony heard his complaint. Sossius was commanded to give positive and active aid to Herod. Plerod then proceeded with determination to the task of overthrowing the supporters of Antigonus. Joseph, the brother of Herod, had already been defeated and beheaded. Herod overwhelmed a detachment of the army of Antigonus in Samaria and soon only Jerusalem was left to offer resistance.
With the assistance of Sossius and a large Roman army Herod felt sure that his attack on Jerusalem would be successful. So confident did he feel as he attacked the city that he took a holiday and went to Samaria in order to marry Mariamrne, the Maccabean princess, an event he had been long [ p. 50 ] postponing until he should establish himself as king. It took the battering-rams forty days to demolish the first, or outer, wall of Jerusalem. The second was demolished fifteen days later. The temple was taken after a further siege. Then the invading Roman army gave itself to an orgy of murder and plunder. Herod succeeded, only by great presents, in stopping their murderous pillage of his city. Antigonus was sent captive to Antony and later, at Herod’s request, put to death. In 37 B.C. Herod became actual ruler of Judea.
The Period of Conflict. — The period from 37 to 25 B.C. was one long period of struggle. During those years Herod was constantly combating enemies of one kind or another.
The Pharisees were naturally opposed to the rule of a man who was an Idumean and an ally of Rome. But the Sadducean nobility who had supported Antigonus, were also his enemies. Forty-five of the most prominent of the Sadducees were executed at the command of Herod; the confiscation of their goods procured money for his treasury. But Herod’s most determined enemy was his own mother-in-law, Alexandra. Through the influence of her daughter, Mariamme, she had her son Aristobulus, Mariamme’s brother, made high priest. To do this she was forced to dispose of Hyrcanus and Ananel. Herod had brought back the aged Hyrcanus from captivity. His ears had been cut off, so that he could not become high priest himself. Herod, therefore, had chosen an obscure Babylonian Jew named Ananel to be high priest to assist Hyrcanus. He now had to depose Ananel, although legally the position of high priest was for life.
Young Aristobulus was, however, not long to remain in office. He was too popular. Herod feared this handsome prince of the Asmonean line. In 35 B.C. a demonstration at the Feast of Tabernacles decided matters in Herod’s mind. Aristobulus was drowned while bathing with his comrades. The people refused to believe that it was an accident in spite of Herod’s public expression of grief.
Alexandra appealed at once to Cleopatra, who requested Antony to call Herod to account. Herod took gifts with him [ p. 51 ] and succeeded in persuading Antony to pronounce him innocent. As he had not been sure that he would return alive, he had commanded his uncle Joseph to slay Mariamme if he should not return. He could not bear the thought of anyone else possessing her. But his secret command to Joseph became known to her, and this expression of his love proved a great menace to the family relations.
Cleopatra was another enemy with whom Herod had to reckon during all these first years of his reign. She requested of Antony the best districts of Palestine, including the beautiful environs of Jericho. Antony granted her request and Herod was forced to make the best of a bad situation.
The war between Antony and Octavius, which broke out in 32 B.C., presented a serious situation for Plerod. But fortune favored him again. He was sent by Antony, at Cleopatra’s request, to subdue Arabia. Thus he was not actively engaged in the conflict between Antony and Octavius. In his campaign against Arabia he was at first unsuccessful. After a series of defeats he could only make intermittent attacks. In 31 B.C. Palestine was afflicted by an earthquake. Thirty thousand men are said to have perished. His forces depleted, Herod made overtures for peace. His messengers, however, were murdered by the Arabs. Herod then gathered all the troops he could find, revived their sinking courage by his oratory, and sallied forth again toward Arabia. This time he succeeded in overwhelming the Arabian army.
Meanwhile, Antony and Octavius had come to grips. The great battle of Actium occurred on the 2nd of September, 31 B.c. As a result of the issue Herod now found himself obliged to seek the favor of Octavius. Since Herod had not been actively engaged against Octavius and was now able to render some assistance to the Roman troops in Syria, he decided to present himself to Octavius and to request of him the confirmation of his title as king of Judea.
In the spring of 30 B.C. he found Octavius, now Augustus Caesar, on the Island of Rhodes. Herod boldly related his past [ p. 52 ] services to Antony, intimating liis present usefulness to Augustus. Augustus in his turn saw the value of retaining this man who had always been found faithful to Roman authority. So Herod attained the object of his visit, was confirmed in his position as king, and went back to Judea rejoicing.
When Augustus passed through Palestine on his way to Egypt and again on his return northward, Herod treated him with great pomp and honor. In return he received back from Augustus the beautiful environs of Jericho which Antony had given to Cleopatra. He received also other important fortresses.
Again Herod had trouble in his own family. On his departure for Rhodes he repeated his command concerning Mariamme, that she should be slain if he did not return. Again Mariamme learned of his order. Upon the return of Herod, Salome, his sister, persuaded the royal cup-bearer to tell Herod that Mariamme was plotting to poison him. Herod investigated the charge at once, and when he found that his secret command had again become known to Mariamme the suspicion seemed to be well founded. Mariamme was tried and pronounced guilty of such a plot and put to death in 29 B.C.
Herod s remorse over the death of his beloved wife drove him to seek relief in long and strenuous hunting parties and excessive revelry which even his powerful constitution could not stand. He became so ill that Alexandra thought he was about to die. She immediately started an intrigue with those who were in command of the fortress of Jerusalem, with a view to making herself queen after his death. But Herod discovered what she was doing. In 28 B.C. Alexandra was also put to death.
Salome, the sister, was growing weary of her husband, Costobar, an Idumean of considerable ability, whom Herod had made governor of Idumea. Costobar had secretly kept alive certain children who were distantly connected with the Asmonean family. These “sons of Babos” had been sought by Herod for many years. Salome now revealed the secret to Herod and the children were slain. Thus in 25 B.C. the last relative of Hyrcanus and the last possible rival to the throne was put out of the way.
[ p. 53 ]
So less than a quarter of a century before the birth of Christ the Maccabean line which had championed the cause of the people so gloriously had come to an end. The old Maccabean days were gone. Since the death of Simon the leaders of the Jews had drifted farther and farther away from sympathy with the people, until now their only leader was a foreigner whose greatest ambition was to maintain his close relationship with Rome and Caesar. The people had no one to whom they could look for shepherding care. A few years later Jesus of Nazareth appeared with the glad announcement of a coming kingdom which would not be a kingdom of Herod, but a Kingdom of God, a kingdom not for the leaders at Jerusalem, but for the “poor” of Galilee (Lk. 6: 20. See p. 120).
The Period of Building .—The years from 25 to 13 B.C. were the prosperous years of Herod’s reign. There were fewer executions, fewer battles. Economic enterprises flourished. The kingdom of which he had now become a secure master developed power and prestige.
Although a “Barbarian,” Herod endeavored to imitate the Greek culture. Especially noteworthy were his building enterprises. At Jerusalem he constructed a theater and amphitheater. Later, in 24 B.C., he built himself a beautiful and richly adorned palace which he fortified against the possibility of siege. The city of Samaria he entirely rejuvenated and rehabilitated, giving it a new name, Sebaste. On the coast he took the site of Strato’s Tower and built there a city with a splendid harbor, giving it the name of Caesarea in honor of Caesar Augustus. In the plain he built the city of Antipatris in honor of his father Antipater. Phasaelis near the Jordan he built in honor of his brother Phasaelus. Agrippaeum he named after Agrippa. For himself he reared two citadels called Herodium, one ten miles south of Jerusalem on what today is called the Frank Mountain. The view from this mountain on whose peak the ruins of Herod’s great castle still remain is glorious and impressive. Nowhere else is the panorama of the Dead Sea and the [ p. 54 ] surrounding country so magnificent. [1] He restored and fortified Alexandrium, Hyrcania and the impregnable fortresses of Machaerus and Masada.
His building operations were not confined to Palestine. On the island of Rhodes he built the Pythian Temple. In Nicopolis near Actium he aided the erection of many public buildings. Antioch, Chios, Ascalon, Tyre, Sidon, and even Athens benefited from his building enthusiasm.
But his crowning achievement was the restoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The magnificence of Jerusalem and of Herod’s court had outgrown the temple of Zerubbabel. Herod began the reconstruction of the temple in the year 20-19 B.C. According to the Gospel of John (2: 20) the work had been going on for forty-six years. The completion of the temple did not occur, however, until 62 A.D., a few years before its final destruction. It was a proverb in the time of Christ, “He who has not seen Herod’s building has never seen anything beautiful.”
Not only in building enterprises, but in many other ways, Herod displayed his enthusiasm for Greek culture. Greek games were held at Jerusalem and at Caesarea. Colonies were established, especially in the country on the “other” side of the Sea of Galilee, where Jesus often resorted. He drove out the robbers and demoniacs, making it a civilized and habitable, though rocky, section. At Jerusalem he laid parks with walks and fountains. He installed places for the rearing of domestic pigeons.
Herod gathered about him a large company of Greek philosophers and learned men to keep him informed as to what was best in the Greek world. His whole court was Greek rather than Oriental, yet in spite of it all he remained a barbarian in mind and spirit. It was not an idle boast when he claimed to be more of a Greek than a Jew, but the boast was true only in an external and political sense. He was a violent and passionate monarch to the end.
[ p. 55 ]
His relation to the Pharisees and to the patriotic nationalists is interesting. Again and again he yielded to Jewish scruples, and then, as though in mockery, directly opposed their most precious customs. For example, he directed that the temple work should be carried on by priests, and priests only. He himself did not enter the inner temple. But when the central building of the temple was completed, he set a Roman eagle over the gateway, as if in insult to all who entered to worship there. His Greek court advisers and officials, his artistic building enterprises, and his actual fostering of Hellenistic worship within Judea constituted the principal Greek and foreign elements of his reign.
The tribute Herod exacted was a heavy burden to his subjects. All the glory of his reign had to be borne by the Jewish people. They endured it because there was no alternative. The Pharisees revolted in their inmost hearts against this oppression with all its heathen trappings. But Herod kept a strong hand upon the government. He had large forces of paid European troops to carry out his orders, to preserve the peace. The fortresses which he built with Jewish money he used for his own protection from his own people. Toward the end of his reign all private meetings and public gatherings were forbidden.
From an external point of view, however, his reign was useful and prosperous. The harbor which he built at Caesarea was used for centuries as the chief port for Palestinean travel and commerce. The facility of travel in New Testament times was due in no small measure to Herod’s achievements.
At times Herod was very good to his people. Once he reduced the taxes by one-third and later by one-fourth. Again during a famine he took even his own silverware and sold it to buy bread for the populace.
The position of a dependent king in the Roman Empire was not a mean one. He must have his title approved by the Roman Emperor. His successor, too, could be appointed only after Roman approval. The office was not hereditary, but after he [ p. 56 ] had once become established such a potentate had all the authority of a king with his own people, to exercise the right of life and death, to impose taxes, to organize armies. Herod had also inherited from his father the right of Roman citizenship. Like the Apostle Paul, he was a Roman born (cf. Acts 22: 28).
Herod lost no opportunity to cultivate the favor of Augustus and to assert his loyalty. He visited Augustus at least seven times during his reign, probably oftener. Herod also established friendly relations with Agrippa. Agrippa (63-12 B.C.) was a Roman general and statesman, and a trusted counselor of Augustus. In 16 B.c. Agrippa visited Herod and was received by the Jews with great acclaim. Herod returned this visit, taking with him a fleet to assist Agrippa in an expedition to the Crimea. The meeting-place was the old Greek colony of Sinope on the Black Sea. [2]
Herod’s intimacy with Rome naturally brought him many gifts of territory. In 23 B.C., while Alexander and Aristobulus, his sons, were studying at Rome, the emperor presented to Herod the tracts of land between the Sea of Galilee and Damascus, namely Trachonitis, Batanea, and Auranitis (Lk. 3:1). Other districts were given him from time to time. At one period of his reign the procurators of Syria were commanded to consult Herod in all their most important provincial decisions.
This period of Herod’s reign is also of importance because of the great advantages which accrued to the Jews of the Dispersion during this time. Every case of injustice or discrimination was taken up by Herod. Their cause was championed in a way which meant much for the initial success and rapid expansion of the Christian Gospel through the synagogues of the Dispersion.
The Period of Domestic Troubles. —Herod’s domestic troubles grew more aggravating as the end of his reign approached. [ p. 57 ] The two sons of Mariamme who were in the Asmonean line were the primary objects of his suspicion. These two sons, Alexander and Aristobulus, realized that their royal blood gave them a greater claim to power than their Idumean father had. After 17 B.C., when they returned from Rome, where they had been sent for their education, they were perpetually slandered by Salome. To meet this situation Herod recalled his oldest son, Antipater, whom he had exiled, hoping that the fact that Antipater was the oldest of his sons would offset the ambitions inspired by the royal blood of the sons of Mariamme, and that, thus balanced, a domestic felicity would be established.
But Antipater proved rather to be the instigator of increasing family strife. He stirred up Pheroras and Salome, the brother and sister of Herod, to repeat their accusations that Alexander and Aristobulus were plotting to assassinate their father. A Greek named Eurykles added fresh fuel to the fire of domestic dissension by cleverly encouraging the antagonism between father and sons.
Finally, Herod’s suspicion of Alexander and Aristobulus became almost a mania. He formally accused them of such plotting before the emperor and finally received permission to deal with them as he wished. In B.C. 7, at Sebaste, at the place of his marriage to Mariamme, her sons were executed.
These results of his intrigue were highly satisfactory to Antipater. For the moment he held the absolute confidence of his father. Not long after, however, with his uncle Pheroras he began to plot the death of the aged king. Salome reported the matter to Herod. Antipater hastily left on a visit to Rome.’ But when Pheroras died the whole plot became so obvious to Herod that he summoned Antipater home. Not knowing the extent of his father’s discoveries, Antipater returned to Jerusalem and was immediately seized. Five days before his death Herod received the consent of Rome, and Antipater was executed.
Herod’s last illness, a lingering painful disease, was now [ p. 58 ] fast overcoming him. He was seventy years old. He still put down vehemently and cruelly any revolt which arose because of rumors of his death. But even the Baths of Callirrhoe beyond the Jordan could not alleviate Herod’s suffering. He saw that his end was near and imprisoned a large number of distinguished men, giving orders that as soon as he died they should be slain, that his death might not be without general public grief. This cruel order was fortunately not carried out, but it affords a striking parallel to the statement found in the Gospel of Matthew (2: 16) that he gave orders for the slaying of all infants in a certain area because he feared that one of them might become king of the Jews.
Herod’s death in 4 B.C. was hailed as a blessing by all the people, even those of his own household. He was buried with great pomp. He had been a strange and terrible combination of Oriental despot and Roman citizen. In accordance with his last will, Archelaus, the son of Malthace, became king of Judea, Antipas her younger son became tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and Philip, son of Cleopatra of Jerusalem became tetrarch of Trachonitis and neighboring districts.
The reign of Herod is especially important for the student of early Christianity because of its blending of Jewish and Hellenistic elements. Herod’s reign more than any other made travel secure for Jews. His building of the harbor at Caesarea opened up Palestine to the world and the world to Palestine. That was his Hellenistic contribution. Before his day Hellenism had made its home in Palestine, but Herod made Judaism feel at home in the Roman Empire.
The reign of Herod intensified the longing of the Jewish people for a leader and champion. The Maccabean champions had taken up the cause of the people. If Jesus of Nazareth had lived in the days of the Maccabees, he would have been found visiting with them frequently. But the Maccabean line was gone. Even Alexander and Aristobulus, who had some Jewish blood, had been executed in 7 B.C., probably the very year [ p. 59 ] in which Jesus was born. To whom should the people look? “Jesus’ heart was touched at the sight of them because they were as sheep without a shepherd” (Mk. 6: 34; Matt. 9: 36).
Archelaus. 4 B.C. to 6 A.D. Judea .—After the death of Herod, Archelaus was publicly acknowledged as king of Judea. Although he was not officially king until his title should be recognized by Augustus, he was at once besieged by petitions and demands for reforms in the government. He acceded to these demands so far as seemed practicable to him. He released many who had been imprisoned by Herod. He modified the system of taxation. But the Pharisees were not satisfied. They thought their opportunity had come for avenging themselves for all the wrongs they had suffered under Herod. At the Passover Feast Archelaus feared a serious revolt and “preserved the peace” by ordering his troops to attack the tumult of Jews. Three thousand of them were slain.
Archelaus had to make his pilgrimage to Rome for confirmation of his title (cf. Lk. 19: 12). While he was gone matters went wild in Palestine. Revolt increased and patriots grew bolder until at Pentecost the Jews took possession of the temple and barricaded themselves. They fought from the roofs of the outbuildings of the temple until the Roman soldiers in desperation set fire to the beautiful cedar beams. The misguided patriots died in the flames or were cut down by the soldiers. The temple treasure to the amount of four hundred talents ($400,000) was seized by the Romans. Later two thousand Jews were publicly crucified by Varus, the Roman general.
At Rome a delegation of fifty Jews from Palestine, backed by the eight thousand Jews of the city of Rome, was endeavoring to prevent the nomination of Archelaus as king of Judea. But Augustus decided to place Archelaus over Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. Subsequently he was to have the title of king if [ p. 60 ] he showed ability to handle the situation. At first he had the title of ethnarch.
Like his father, Archelaus was an enthusiast for building. He rebuilt a palace at Jericho. He beautified the palm groves surrounding that city. Near Phasaelis he built a town named after himself, Archelais. But all the evil traits of his father he possessed in increased measure. He played with the high-priesthood, removing one high priest and appointing another at his pleasure. He married the widow of Alexander, his half brother, in spite of all Jewish law and feeling against such a marriage. His reign was barbarous and despotic. The end came when the chiefs of the Jews made a plea to Augustus accusing Archelaus of incapacity and cruelty. Archelaus was summoned to Rome. In 6 A.D. he was condemned, his property was confiscated, and he was banished to Gaul. Rome at once began to organize Judea as a Roman province. Quirinius took a census of the people (cf. Luke 2:2). Soon afterward Judea, Samaria, and Idumea were incorporated as a Roman province. Coponius was the first procurator.
The early procurators of Judea were not important and the records concerning their character and work are scanty. Pontius Pilate ruled from 26 to 36 A.D. Even of him we have very little information that is definite and reliable. The descriptions of his character as harsh and cruel and reckless are in large part due to his sanction of the crucifixion of Jesus the Galilean. He would not have remained governor for ten years under the able Emperor Tiberius had he not shown good governing ability. He approved the crucifixion of Jesus because he feared that the Galilean was another who aspired to be king of the Jews and who therefore might head still a fresh revolt against Roman authority.
Herod Antipas. 4 B.C. to 39 A.D. Galilee and Perea .—Herod Antipas received the Roman title of tetrarch, and in accord with Herod’s will governed Galilee and Perea.
Galilee was peculiar in that its population was composed of [ p. 61 ] both Jews and Gentiles. During the days of Herod the Great a tide of Jewish colonization had swept in without driving out the Gentile elements, which had been there for centuries. In the time of Christ, Galilee was well inhabited. There were three walled cities and over two hundred villages. The Sea of Galilee was a center of busy life. The devotion of the Jewish population to the Scriptures and to the law was fervent and strong. The moral life was healthier than elsewhere. A large proportion of the people were fishermen and “husbandmen.” They were a simple, loyal, sturdy folk, hoping against hope for the Messianic Kingdom, careful in the observance of the Sabbath and the feasts. On the other hand, they were in constant touch with Hellenistic civilization and had a broad view of life and the world. The trade routes between Egypt and countries to the north passed through their land. From the hilltop near Nazareth their eyes could delight in the snows of Hermon, and the lines of camels winding their way along the caravan routes between Damascus and Egypt, but they would rest also with a certain sense of refreshment upon two different glimpses of the blue Mediterranean in the west which hinted of the lands beyond the sea, even Rome and the ends of the world (see p. 109).
The other half of the domain of Herod Antipas was the district east of the Jordan River known as Perea. The word “Perea” means the country “beyond.” It comprised the region between the Yarmuk and Arnon rivers. It was more Jewish than Philip’s domain to the north. Antipas did not presume to put any image on the coins which he minted. Yet interspersed with the districts of Perea was the “region of the decapolis” (Matt. 4: 25; Mk. 5: 20, 7: 31). The decapolis was not really a region but a loose confederacy of “ten Greek cities” which were banded together for mutual protection. The ruins of these cities as they exist today show Greek architecture, Greek theaters, Greek art and life. These cities were a peculiar phenomenon in the midst of all the Judaism which surrounded them. They [ p. 62 ] were another hint of the interweaving of Jewish and Greek elements which was to take place in the expansion of Christianity.
Herod Antipas governed from 4 B.C. to 39 A.D., covering all the years of Jesus’ youth and ministry. He was more like his father than were his brothers. He was fond of building and reconstructing. He rebuilt the city of Sepphoris, an important center in Galilee. Perhaps Joseph, possibly Jesus himself, worked on this reconstruction. His building extended also beyond Palestine to the islands of Cos and Delos. Most important for our study is his reconstruction of the village on the shore of the sea of Galilee, which he named Tiberias, after the emperor Tiberius who was ruling at that time. Luke refers to the emperor (Lk. 3:1). The Gospel of John mentions the city (6: 23). The city became so important that the whole Lake or Sea of Galilee was called “The Sea of Tiberias” (John 6: 1, 21: 1). The city included a royal palace with costly ornaments, a Greek stadium, and a Jewish house of prayer. It is today the only city remaining on the lake. Its walls are still standing almost intact. Its massive fortifications still extend down into the water. Its streets were colonnaded. Antipas made it his capital city.
Like his father, Herod Antipas was a clever and cunning despot. He is called “king” by the Gospel of Mark, though Luke is careful to use his proper title of “tetrarch” (Lk. 3: x vs. Mk. 6: 22). Most of Jesus’ life was spent under this ruler. Occasionally Jesus visited the domain of Philip or went up to Jerusalem. Jesus’ characterization of Antipas is excellent. He was a “fox” (Lk. 13: 32). He went once with the Roman general Vitellius to treat with the king of Parthia. After the meeting with the king and the signing of the treaty, Herod dispatched a fast messenger to the emperor and was thus the first to report the good news. This brought him favor with the emperor. But the foxlike trick later made trouble for him.
In his dealings with the Jews Herod likewise showed this foxlike character. He counterbalanced his Hellenistic and Roman sympathies by outward acts of Jewish piety. He made [ p. 63 ] it a point to attend the feasts at Jerusalem. Thus it happened that Jesus met him face to face at a Passover (Lk. 23: 4-12). Herod recognized in Jesus a leader of a shepherdless people and Jesus recognized in Herod the despotic and self-seeking enemy of the gospel of brotherhood and service and shepherding care.
Also like his father, Antipas had serious domestic troubles. He fell in love with Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, while on a trip to Rome. [3] They were later married. It was this relationship which John the Baptist censured so severely. Herodias did not rest till she brought about the execution of John (Mk. 6: 14-29). Herod’s first wife, daughter of the king of Arabia, went home to her father. Her father made an expedition against Herod. Vitellius, who was only waiting his chance to “get even” for the trick Herod had played him in the Parthian matter, betrayed Herod in such a way that he was defeated and the king of Arabia withdrew before Herod could gather his forces again.
Herodias was very ambitious for her husband, encouraging him finally to ask the emperor, Caligula, for the title of king. Agrippa seized the opportunity to accuse him before the emperor of planning a revolt. Caligula refused even a trial and banished Herod and his wife in 39 A.D. to Gaul, whither his brother Archelaus had gone over thirty years before.
Philip. 4 B.C. to 34 A.D. Trachonitis .—According to the will of Herod, Philip inherited the territory between the Yarmuk River and Damascus. It was often called Trachonitis after the name of one of its districts (cf. Lk. 3:1).
Of the three brothers who inherited the domain of Herod, Philip was the most Hellenistic. He was not so aggressive as his father. He did not leave his territory, but contented himself with governing well. He sought the counsel of a few able friends and spent his time traveling through his domain dispensing justice. He built the city of Caesarea at one of the sources [ p. 64 ] of the Jordan and made it a place of refuge. It was called Caesarea of Philip, or Caesarea Philippi (Mk. 8: 27). It was quite natural that Jesus should take refuge there in time of persecution when he desired time to rest and think out his future action. Philip’s Hellenistic tendency is further evidenced by his coins, which bear his image. This practice is almost unparalleled among the Jews who had a deep-rooted aversion to making images even on coins. After a long and peaceful and beneficial reign Philip died in 34 A.D. His district was at first annexed to Syria and then three years later (37 A.D.) presented to Herod Agrippa I.
Herod Agrippa I ( 37 to 44 A.D.).—The next great leader in Jewish politics is one who unites these various districts under one head again. To outward appearances the kingdom of Herod the Great was reestablished. Agrippa I was son of Aristobulus and so grandson of Herod the Great and of the Maccabean princess, Mariamme. He was named after the Roman statesman, Agrippa, the friend of Herod the Great. He lived in Rome until the age of forty. Having used up all his fortune, he could find no further favor at court and was obliged to leave the imperial city.
When he came to Palestine he was in still greater despair and want. Finally his wife appealed to his sister Herodias, the wife of Antipas, and obtained for Agrippa a position under Antipas in Tiberias. But Agrippa soon quarreled with his uncle Antipas and became again a wanderer. In Damascus he was detected receiving bribes and was forced to leave that place. He succeeded in borrowing some money and started for Rome once more.
In Rome with the remainder of his borrowed money he gained the friendship of Caius, who afterward became the Emperor Caligula. He was arrested, however, on a charge of having uttered a wish that the reigning emperor Tiberius would die in order that Caius might succeed to the power. He remained in prison until the death of Tiberius. Naturally, as soon as Tiberius died and Caius (37—41 A.D.) became emperor, he [ p. 65 ] released Agrippa and rewarded him. Agrippa was appointed king of Trachonitis in 37 A.D. and on the banishment of Antipas in 39 A.D. he was given the districts of Galilee and Perea.
Agrippa was naturally inclined to favor his people, the Jews. He rendered them many valuable services. When the Emperor Caligula commanded his statue to be set up in the temple at Jerusalem (Mk. 13: 14) Agrippa averted revolt and bloodshed by personally inducing Caligula to change the order.
Like Herod the Great, Agrippa was able to win favor with successive emperors. When Claudius became emperor in 41 A.D. he conferred upon Agrippa various districts of Palestine, including Judea, until the kingdom of Agrippa became as extensive as the domain of Herod the Great. He was also given the right to appoint the high priest at Jerusalem.
Judaism awoke to new life for the few brief years from 41 to 44 A.D. Agrippa kept the enactments of the Pharisees. He resided in Jerusalem, kept his temple obligations, was careful and considerate in the appointment of a high priest, and in general respected Jewish feeling. He minted Jewish coins which did not bear any image. His zeal for Judaism is shown in his arrest of James and Peter and in putting James to death as narrated in Acts 12:2.
Like his grandfather, he was fond of Greek customs and institutions, of the theater and the amphitheater, of public baths and colonnaded streets. At one of the celebrations of the Greek games in Caesarea in the year 44 A.D., he had made an oration, and the people in applause had shouted, “The voice of a god,” when he was smitten by a sudden attack of some unknown disease and died soon afterward (Acts 12: 19-23).
Claudius, the emperor, decided that the son of Agrippa was too young to succeed his father, for Agrippa II was a boy of but seventeen years. The Judean state was placed under a Roman procurator. In 50 A.D. Claudius gave the young Agrippa the general superintendence of the temple and the right to appoint the high priest. In a later year (53 A.D.) Agrippa received [ p. 66 ] the tetrarchy of Philip and still later other districts around the sea of Galilee.
In 58 A.D. Agrippa was making his conventional visit to the newly arrived procurator, Festus, in Caesarea, when this governor asked his advice about Paul. This gave Paul his opportunity to make his defense before Agrippa: “I consider myself happy, King Agrippa . . . because you are expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews. . . . And Agrippa said to Paul, With a few persuasive words you would like to make me a Christian” (Acts 26:2, 3, 28).
Agrippa gradually lost sympathy with the Jews and retired into his northern districts, where he ruled until 100 A.D., long years after the Jewish state had been annihilated by Rome.
Increasing Discontent under the Roman Governors .—It is no mere accident that the final fall of Jerusalem coincides with the period of the most rapid expansion of Christian evangelism. Jerusalem would long have been regarded as the head of the Christian Church had it not been for the annihilation of the Jewish state. When Jerusalem was no more, Gentile converts took Christianity into their own hands and freed it quickly of many of its national characteristics. Christians are able to look upon the terrible end of Judea as a providential event. But for the Jews it marked the extinction of the last hope of national independence. For centuries the chosen people of God had hoped and struggled for political power. After the destruction of their temple the Jews devoted themselves no longer to warfare and bloodshed but to the study of their sacred Law.
After the death of Agrippa I in 44 A.D. the character of the procurators of Judea speedily degenerated. Judaism became more and more restless, until matters came to such a pass that almost anyone who claimed to be Messiah could get an immediate following. The Jews were ready to accept any leader who promised any hope of even temporary relief. One named Theudas [ p. 67 ] promised to lead his followers across the Jordan on dry land and was able to gather a band of about 400 about him. His popularity grew so suddenly that Fadus, the procurator (44-46 A.D.), attacked the zealots with his soldiers. lie seized Theudas and slew him “and all as many as obeyed him were dispersed and came to nought” (Acts 5: 36; Josephus, Antiquities, XX, 5:1).
The Book of Acts is apparently following Josephus in relating this uprising of Theudas; for Josephus in his next paragraph relates the uprising of Judas of Galilee, which he says had taken place in the days of enrollment under Quirinius (6-7 A.D.). The account in Acts, while following the order of names in Josephus, has in so doing inverted the chronological order of these names.
The next procurator, Alexander (46-48 A.D.), was also compelled to deal with a similar revolt and crucified the two sons of the Judas of Galilee who had started the revolution under Quirinius. Cumanus (48-52 A.D.) also found it necessary to perpetrate a massacre of the Jews in a Passover riot. Under Cumanus matters grew rapidly worse, until he was banished through the influence of Agrippa II. After him came Felix, 52 to 58 A.D. (Acts 23: 24 to 25: 14).
In these last years of the Jewish state, the end became ever more apparent. All sorts of men arose who made extravagant promises concerning the wonderful deeds which they would accomplish because of their divine mission and character. Felix found it necessary to take stringent measures with these “messiahs.” One whom men did not soon forget became known as “the Egyptian.” When Paul was in Jerusalem amid the mob, he was asked: “Are you not then the Egyptian, who before these days stirred up to sedition and led out into the wilderness the four thousand men of the Assassins?” (Acts 21: 38).
Doubtless we have here the explanation of the term “robbers” or “bandits” of which Josephus speaks so much. They were evidently leaders of smaller or larger bands of patriotic [ p. 68 ] Jews looking for a deliverance from the hand of the Romans and from the encroaching Hellenistic spirit. One leader, Eleazar, resisted and avoided capture through twenty years. In vain did Felix crucify or send to Rome those upon whom he could lay hands. Such bands of misguided patriots roamed up and down the country fomenting rebellion.
One particularly formidable feature was the presence of bands of desperate men who carried daggers. They were called “Sicarii,” the “dagger” men. At one time they murdered the high priest and in general spread terror in the land. The hand of Felix was too nervous to deal with the situation; at times he was too negligent, at times he was too cruel. It was a band of these Sicarii which almost succeeded in slaying the Apostle Paul, who was saved only by the quick action of his sister’s son (Acts 23: 12-16).
The Emperor Nero finally called for Felix’s resignation. It is an empty and perhaps ironical compliment which Tertullus addressed to Felix: “Seeing that by you we enjoy much peace, and that by your providence evils are corrected for this nation, we accept it in all ways and in all places, most excellent Felix, with all thankfulness” (Acts 24: 2b, 3).
The Last Governors of Judea .—After the regime of Felix came the governorship of Festus (58 to 62 A.D.). Festus had the same problem which Felix faced. He would, perhaps, have improved the situation to some extent had his death not occurred so inopportunely. Josephus records that Festus also had to deal with the Sicarii: “And then it was that the Sicarii grew numerous … . they mingled themselves among the multitude at the festivals, when the people were come up in crowds from all parts to the city to worship God, and easily slew that they had a mind to slay. They also came frequently upon the villages belonging to their enemies with their weapons, and plundered them and set them on fire. So Festus sent forces, both horsemen and footmen, to fall upon those that had been seduced by a certain impostor who promised them deliverance and freedom from the miseries that they were under, if they would follow [ p. 69 ] him as far as the wilderness” (Josephus, Antiquities, XX, 8: 10).
After the death of Festus, Judea was without a governor for some months. Before Albinus (62—64 A.D.) arrived the country fell into great confusion. The high priest, Ananus, took it upon himself to deal with the situation, a task which was far beyond his power. He seized all who were considered to be religious fanatics, assembled the Sanhedrin, and secured sentences of death by stoning. The peace-loving people strongly resented this and formally requested King Agrippa to put a stop to such proceedings. King Agrippa II, to whom had been given the authority over the high-priesthood, deposed Ananus.
Among those whom Ananus had seized and condemned was James, the brother of Jesus. “He assembled the Sanhedrin of judges and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others. And when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned” (Josephus, Antiquities, XX, 9: 1). This is the only passage in which Josephus mentions Jesus. Another passage sometimes cited is by most scholars considered not genuine.
The removal of Ananus from the high-priesthood only made matters worse. The Sicarii grew constantly bolder. They made a practice of kidnapping and subsequently exchanging their victims for those of their own number who had been imprisoned. The high-priesthood became a prize for which rival candidates fought. Albinus did not help matters. He soon realized his inability to deal with the problem. When he saw that his recall was imminent, he accepted bribes and sold freedom to prisoners in wholesale fashion. [4]
In the year 64 the temple was completed. In the time of Jesus this temple had been “forty and six years in building” (John 2: 20). Through all the long period of years from 20 b . c . to 64 A.D. a large force of workmen had been busy on the various [ p. 70 ] buildings of the great temple. “Now,” says Josephus, “over eighteen thousand workmen were suddenly thrown out of work and were in want” ( Antiquities , XX, 9:7). This unemployment, of course, added greatly to the general disturbance. In order i.o improve the situation, Agrippa allowed the use of the temple treasure itself for the hiring of men to pave great portions of the city with white stones.
The end was rapidly approaching. One more Roman procurator was sent to Judea. His record is a bad one. Florus (64-66 A.D.) was so little in sympathy with Jewish traditions, and so unsympathetic of any interests but his own selfish ends, that he soon precipitated open rebellion. It is probable that he himself fomented trouble in order to cover up his own evil doings. However, the situation was really created, not so much by the selfish Roman officials, as by the general attitude of those Jews who thought that conspiracy and battle and bloodshed were instruments in bringing in a new kingdom where God should rule supreme! Jesus had clearly foreseen these times. “All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Matt. 26: 52). “From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and men of violence take it by force” (Matt. 11: 12). “There shall not be left here one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down” (Matt. 24: 2). “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2: 19).
The Jewish Uprising .—The immediate cause of the end was trivial, almost insignificant. Its significance lay only in the fact that crystallization, when once it had begun, proceeded quickly and thoroughly. A petty conflict arose in Caesarea over certain building rights on the approach to the synagogue. Josephus aptly says, “The occasion of this war was by no means proportionable to those heavy calamities which it brought upon us” (Wars II, 14: 4). The conflict soon developed into a race war between Hellenists and Jews. The Hellenists made sport of the Jewish scruples and ceremonies. The Jews appealed to Florus. Florus replied by going to Jerusalem and taking a good [ p. 71 ] piece of the temple treasure and by allowing his troops to rob and kill almost without restraint.
Agrippa II intervened and tried to make peace by persuading the Jews to make a proper complaint to the emperor. But feeling had run too high. Conspiracy and bloodshed became rapidly more widespread. The success of the Sicarii in seizing the impregnable rock fortress, Masada, and the success of other bands in seizing the lower or eastern part of the city of Jerusalem and the temple area, added greatly to the fury of the outbreak. The aristocratic people of Jerusalem were penned up in the upper city. The lower classes felt that their time for revenge was at hand. Their grievances, which they had harbored for so long, overcame them. Agrippa’s beautiful palace and the palace of the high priest were burned. The public depositories for the keeping of deeds and bonds were destroyed with the hope that there might be a return of the old historical Year of Jubilee in which all legal obligations were canceled.
Manahem, a son of Judas the Galilean (Acts 5: 37, see p. 67) gathered about him a company of strong men of Galilee, distributed arms to his people, and went up to Jerusalem as messiah. The Zealots, who were not in sympathy with such a king, finally overwhelmed his followers and seized him and slew him.
The priests at Jerusalem omitted the customary sacrifice for the emperor. This was an act of open revolt. If there had been any doubt as to the character of the uprising, it was removed when the Roman garrison at Jerusalem, after surrender, was slaughtered. All Syria was aroused and confused. In most of the Greek cities, either the Jews plundered the homes of the Hellenists or were themselves massacred. Cestius Gallus, legate of Syria, made a determined effort to restore peace by means of his Roman troops. At first he -was successful, but before long he was caught in the narrow defiles near Bethhoron. His army was destroyed and he escaped with only a few followers to Antioch. The Jews confiscated the Roman weapons and other war supplies, so there was much rejoicing and encouragement.
[ p. 72 ]
The revolt had now become so serious that the Jews for a while forgot their own civil strifes. The Sanhedrin undertook to organize the fanatical followers of this or that messiah into a political force which should be capable of resisting the inevitable approach of Roman military power. Josephus, the great historian to whom we owe most of our knowledge of the period, was appointed to organize Galilee, which was sure to bear the first brunt of the Roman attack. The story of his clever and skillful maneuvers is indeed romantic. He escaped many dangers and intrigues and lived to hand down to coming generations his twenty books of Antiquities of the Jews, the story of his own life, and the six books describing these last years of the “Jewish Wars.” When he was captured by Vespasian, he prophesied so vividly the victory of the Roman arms and the honors which Vespasian himself should receive, that he was well treated by that Roman general and future emperor.
Vespasian easily subdued Galilee during the summer of 67. The next summer he was fast subjugating Judea when the news of the death of Nero reached him. He at once suspended operations, giving the Jews a chance to renew their civil strifes. The subjugation of Galilee caused the lower classes to lose faith in the organization which the upper classes and the Sanhedrin had effected.
Destruction of Jerusalem .—In Jerusalem the Zealots were led by Eleazar. After the fall of Gischala in Galilee, John of Gischala escaped to Jerusalem, thus adding a second party of Zealots. The upper classes were organized by Ananus. The opposing factions, forgetful of the impending danger from Rome, engaged in a deadly civil war. The Zealots were soon forced to take refuge in the temple area. Only the sacredness of the temple saved them from being exterminated. Meanwhile under John, in their despair, they conspired with a company of Idumeans and succeeded in admitting them to the city. The Idumeans began to assassinate and plunder without restraint. They killed Ananus and other leaders. When they had had their fill, they again withdrew and John of Gischala held the city.
[ p. 73 ]
A Jew named Simon ben-Giora began to plunder and overrun the country to the east of the Jordan and to the south of Jerusalem. After he had made himself master of Hebron, the Anti-Zealot party in Jerusalem invited him to come to their aid. The condition of Jerusalem became pitiable. There were evidently three opposing factions: the Zealots under John of Gischala, the dissatisfied Zealots under Eleazar, the moderate party now aided by Simon ben-Giora and his savage band. The miserable common people of the city ought not to be forgotten. Among them had been hundreds of those who accepted as their leader one who had foreseen these events and had said, “Let them that are in Judea flee to the mountains” (Mk. 13: 14). They had left Jerusalem because they believed that the true kingdom was not a kingdom of war and strife, but of peace and brotherly helpfulness.
John of Gischala held the temple area; Eleazar was shut up in the inner temple; Simon held the upper city. The civil slaughter continued through the year 69 and into the year 70. At the Passover of 70, when the Roman general Titus had just camped before the city, John of Gischala succeeded in assassinating Eleazar. Then, at last, the factions saw the danger from without. John of Gischala and Simon, in the face of death and destruction, cooperated in the opposition to Rome.
Titus found the siege of Jerusalem no easy task. Three sides of the city were protected by precipitous slopes. Only on the north side was it possible to approach the walls. Even here the number of the walls and fortresses made the city practically impregnable. The ruthless destruction of food which had taken place in the civil conflicts was largely responsible for the final capture. From the Passover in the spring until the fall, the Roman legions fought without respite. The Passover pilgrims could not be fed and were expelled from the city, only to be seized and in many cases crucified by the Roman forces. Five months the siege lasted. The first or outer wall, which had been hastily constructed, was taken in a few days. In July, four months after the arrival of the Roman army, Antonia was taken, [ p. 74 ] leaving only one wall between the Romans and the temple courts. Josephus vividly describes the awful suffering, the famine, the civil war, and the unburied dead.
On July 17th in the year 70 the temple sacrifices ceased because there were no animals to be offered and no priests to make the offering. The temple worship, a continuum reaching back into the hoary past, was at last interrupted. It was never again resumed. The end of Jewish national life had come. Neither “in this mountain nor in Jerusalem” did the temple worship take place. It was but a few days until the Romans battered down the wall of the temple area itself. A Roman soldier viciously set fire to the temple buildings. The inhabitants were immediately captured and put to death.
Only one section of the city remained. Simon and John had retreated to the upper city. In September this, too, was taken. Those of the inhabitants who were not killed on the spot were sold into slavery or taken to Rome for the gladiatorial shows. John of Gischala became a life prisoner; Simon marched at Rome in the triumphal procession and was then slain. The site of Jerusalem was thoroughly devastated. Only the hill remained. There would always be some dwellers on the roomy heights, but Jerusalem was gone.
O Jerusalem! Jerusalem! killing the prophets and stoning them that are sent unto her, how often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings. Your house is left unto you desolate (Matt. 23: 37, 38; Lk. 13: 34, 35). If you had known the things which belong to peace! But they are hid from your eyes. For the days shall come upon you when your enemies shall cast up a bank about you and compass you around and keep you in on every side and shall dash you to the ground, and your children within you, and they shall not leave in you one stone upon another (Lk. 19: 42-44).
Fairweather, Background of the Gospels , pp. 181-215.
Foakes Jackson and Lake, Beginnings of Christianity , pp. 1-34. [ p. 75 ]
Fowler, The History and Literature of the New Testament , pp. 13-49.
Kent, Biblical Geography and History, pp. 232-246.
Mathews, History of New Testament Times , pp. 108-156, 206-224.
Schürer, The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus , Div. I, Vol. I, pp. 416-467; Vol. II, pp. 1-43; 150-191; 207-256.
Compare the view from Nebi Samwil or Emmaus as described by van Dyke, Out of Doors in the Holy Land, p. 71.[ ↩︎
Ancient Sinope , by David M. Robinson, p. 256, “Marcus Agrippa’s warm greeting of Herod there and the departure of the two in 16 B.C. upon an expedition to the Simmerian Bosphorus.” Also in American Journal of Philology , yol. xxvii, no. 2.] ↩︎
See Foakes-Jackson, Beginnings of Christianity , vol. i, p. 16. ↩︎
Compare the statement about Felix in Acts 24: 26. ↩︎