THE SOPHERIC AGE.
Enmity of the Samaritans against the Judæans--The Temple
on Mount Gerizim--The High-Priest Manasseh--The mixed
language of the Samaritans--Their veneration for the Law of
Moses--Judaism loses its national meaning--The Jubilee and
Sabbatical Year--Almsgiving--The Council of Seventy--The
Assyrian Characters--The Schools and the Sopherim--Observance
of the Ceremonies--The Prayers--The Future Life--The Judæans
under Artaxerxes II. and III.--Their Banishment to the
Caspian Sea--Johanan and Joshua contend for the office of
High-Priest--Bagoas--The Writings of the Period--The Greeks
and Macedonians--Alexander the Great and the Judæans--Judæa
accounted a Province of Cœlesyria--Struggles between
Alexander's Successors--Capture of Jerusalem by Ptolemy--Judæa
added to the Lagidean-Egyptian Kingdom--The Judæan Colonies in
Egypt and Syria and the Greek Colonies in Palestine.
420-300 B. C. E.
Hatred which arises from rejected love is stronger and more vehement
than enmity resulting from inexplicable antipathy, jealousy, or
disagreement. Sanballat, as well as his Samaritan followers and
companions, out of preference for the God of Israel, had struggled to
be received into the Judæan community. The virulence of their enmity
against Nehemiah, who had raised the commonwealth from its declining
state, was in reality an impetuous offer of love, by which they hoped
to secure an intimate connection with Judæa. But as they were repulsed
again and again, this yearning love changed into burning hatred. When
Sanballat, who thought he had attained his aim by his connection
with the high-priest's family, learned of the insult shown him in
the banishment of his son-in-law Manasseh, because of that priest's
marriage with his daughter, the measure of his wrath was full. He
cunningly conceived the plan of disorganising the Judæan community,
by the help of its own members. What if he were to raise a temple to
the God of Israel, to contest the supremacy of the one at Jerusalem?
There were among his followers priests of the descendants of Aaron, who
could legally conduct the service, as prescribed in the Torah, in the
projected sanctuary. The dignity of high-priest could fitly be assumed
by his son-in-law Manasseh, and the other Aaronides who had been
expelled from the Temple could officiate with him. Everything appeared
favourable to his design. Both his desire of worshipping the God of
Israel, and his ambition to be at the head of a separate community,
could easily be satisfied at the same time.
On the summit of the fruitful Mount Gerizim, at the foot of the city of
Shechem, in the very heart of the land of Palestine, Sanballat built
his Temple, probably after the death of Artaxerxes (about 420).
The Aaronides who had been expelled from Jerusalem, and who were well
versed in all the tenets of the Law, had selected this site because
they knew that, according to the Book of Deuteronomy, the blessings
were to be pronounced upon the followers of the Law of Moses from that
mount. But the Samaritans gave to the old words a new interpretation.
They called, and still call to this day, Mount Gerizim "the Mount of
Blessings," as if blessing and salvation proceeded from the mount
itself. Even the town of Shechem they called "Blessing" (Mabrachta).
Sanballat, or the priests of this temple of Gerizim, declared that the
mixed race of the Samaritans were not descendants of the exiles placed
in that country by an Assyrian king, but that, on the contrary, they
were true Israelites, a remnant of the Ten Tribes, or of the tribes
of Joseph and Ephraim. There may indeed have been amongst them some
descendants of the families who, after the destruction of the kingdom
of the Ten Tribes, clung to Samaria; but that the numerous Cuthæans
who gathered round Sanballat, together with the Ammonites and the
Arabians, were descendants of Joseph and Ephraim and Israelites, was
one of those ingenious and audacious fictions which, by their very
exaggeration, stagger even those who are thoroughly convinced of their
falsehood. Their language, however, betrayed their mixed origin; it was
a conglomeration of Aramaic and other foreign elements, so that it is
to this day impossible to define its origin satisfactorily.
But the venture was a successful one. The Samaritans had their
temple, around which they gathered; they had priests from the house
of Aaron; they impudently opposed their Hargerizim, as they called
their holy mount, to Mount Moriah; they interpreted the Book of the
Law to suit themselves, making it appear that God had designed Mount
Gerizim as a site for a sanctuary, and they proudly called themselves
Israelites. Sanballat and his followers, intent upon attracting a
great many Judæans to their community, tempted them with the offer of
houses and land, and in every way helped to support them. Those who
had been guilty of crime in Judæa or Jerusalem, and feared punishment
were received with open arms by the Samaritans. Out of such elements
a new semi-Judæan community or sect was formed. Their home was in
the somewhat limited district of Samaria, the centre of which was
either the city that gave its name to the province, or the town of
Shechem. The members of the new community became an active, vigorous,
intelligent people, as if Sanballat, the founder, had infused his
spirit into them. In spite of its diminutive size, this sect has
continued until the present day. The existence of the Samaritans, as
a community, may really be considered a signal victory of the Judæan
faith, for it was their religion alone that kept so mixed a people
together; it became the loadstar of their lives, and to it they
remained faithful, in spite of adversity and disaster. The Samaritans
treated the Torah, brought to them by exiled priests, with as much
reverence as the Judæans did, and regulated their religious and social
life according to its requirements. But, in spite of this community
of essential principles, the Judæans were not delighted with this
accession to the ranks of their faith. This first Judæan sect caused
them as much sorrow as those which, at a later period, grew up among
them. The Samaritans were not only their most bitter foes, but actually
denied to them the right of existence as a community. They declared
that they alone were the descendants of Israel, disputing the sanctity
of Jerusalem and its Temple, and affirming that everything established
by the Judæan people was a mere counterfeit of the old Israelitish
customs. The Samaritans were ever on the alert to introduce into their
own country such improvements as were carried into effect in Judæa,
though, had it been in their power, they would have destroyed the
nation which was their model. On the part of the Judæans, the hatred
against their Samaritan neighbours was equally great. They spoke of
them as "the foolish people who lived in Shechem." The enmity between
Jerusalem and Samaria that existed in the time of the two kingdoms
blazed up anew; it no longer bore a political, but a religious
character, and was therefore the more violent and intense.
The existence of the Samaritan sect had, however, a stimulating effect
upon the Judæans: as the latter continually came into collision with
their opponents, and were obliged to listen to doctrines in the highest
degree distasteful to them, they were forced to a careful study of the
essence of their own belief. The Samaritans helped them to acquire
self-knowledge. What was it that distinguished them, not only from the
heathen world, but also from those neighbours who worshipped the one
God, and acknowledged as authoritative the same Revelation? It was the
thought that they possessed a peculiar creed, and the conception of
"Judaism" gained clearness in their minds. Judaism no longer meant a
_nationality_, but a religious _conviction_. The name "Judæan" lost its
racial meaning, and was applied to any adherent of the Jewish faith,
be he a descendant of Judah or Benjamin, an Aaronide or a Levite. The
two fundamental principles of this faith were the acknowledgment of the
one God, and of the Torah, in which God reveals himself through the
mediation of Moses.
The reverence and love with which the Sacred Book came to be regarded
after the days of Ezra and Nehemiah were as deep as had been the
general indifference to it in earlier times. "A wise man trusts the
Law, and the Law is as true to him as the words of the truth-giving
Urim and Thummim." The Torah was looked upon as the quintessence of all
wisdom, and was honoured as such. Hebrew poetry, still full of life,
glorified it with enthusiastic praise. It followed naturally that the
Torah became the fundamental law of the little state or commonwealth of
Judah. Before a Judæan undertook or desisted from any action, he would
ask whether his course was in conformity with the Law. Slavery ceased
to exist; even if a Judæan wished to sell himself as a slave he could
not find a buyer. Therefore the year of Jubilee, intended as a year of
release of slaves, became a superfluous institution. On the other hand,
the Sabbatical year was strictly kept. The debts of the poor were then
cancelled, and the fields lay fallow. Probably the Judæan favourites at
the Persian court had already demanded that, in the Sabbatical year,
the taxes upon the produce of the fields be remitted. The poor were
looked after with great solicitude, for the Pentateuch demanded that
there should be no needy in the land. Alms giving was looked upon in
this new order of things as the exercise of the highest virtue. In
every town, members of the Judæan community were appointed to devote
themselves to the care of the poor. The constant denunciations by the
prophets and psalmists of the hard-heartedness displayed towards the
poor and the helpless were no longer justified. Justice was admirably
administered, and so conscientiously was the law executed that the
Judæan law-officers might have been held up as models to the rest of
the world. Twice a week, on Mondays and Thursdays, the market days,
public courts of justice were held in all large towns.
It was most natural that, as the life of the community was regulated
according to the commands of the Torah, the spiritual leaders of the
people should devise a supreme court of justice, possessing the power
to make and interpret laws. They were but carrying out the words of
Deuteronomy, in which was enjoined the establishment of a superior
court of justice, where a final decision in doubtful cases could be
given. The question now arose as to the number of members to constitute
this court. Seventy elders had shared with Moses the great burden
of his duties, the representatives of the seventy chief families of
the children of Israel. It was therefore decided that the supreme
tribunal and high court of justice should number seventy elders. This
peculiar institution, which lasted until the destruction of the Judæan
commonwealth, which became the strict guardian of the Law, and at times
rose to great political importance, was doubtless called into life at
this period. At no other time could it have arisen. Thus the great
assembly which Nehemiah had originally summoned, merely for the purpose
of accepting the obligations of the Torah, developed into a permanent
council for settling all religious and social questions. The seventy
members of the supreme council were probably chosen from various
great families. The high-priest, whether he was worthy of the dignity
or not, was placed at their head. The president was called "father
of the tribunal" (Ab Beth-din). As soon as the council was formed,
it proceeded to carry into effect what Ezra and Nehemiah had begun,
namely, the application of Judaism or the Law to the life and customs
of the people. This supreme council brought about a complete revolution.
All the changes which we notice two hundred years later in the Judæan
commonwealth were its work; the new regulations which tradition assigns
to Ezra, and which were known under the name of Sopheric regulations
(Dibre Sopherim) were the creations of this body. It laid a sure
foundation for the edifice that was to last thousands of years. During
this period it was that regular readings from the Law were instituted;
on every Sabbath and on every Holy Day a portion from the Pentateuch
was to be read to the assembled congregation. Twice a week, when the
country people came from the villages to market in the neighbouring
towns, or to appeal at the courts of justice, some verses of the
Pentateuch, however few, were to be read publicly. At first only the
learned did the public reading, but gradually as it came to be looked
upon as a great honour to belong to the learned class, every one was
anxious to be called upon to do duty as a reader. But the characters in
which the Torah was written were an obstacle in the way of overcoming
illiteracy. The text of the Torah was written in an antique script with
Phœnician or old Babylonian characters, which could be deciphered only
by practised scribes. For the Judæans in Persia, even more than for the
Judæans in Palestine, the Torah was a book with seven seals. It was
therefore necessary to transform the old-fashioned characters of the
Hebrew Scriptures (Khetab Ibrith) into others, which were familiar to
the inhabitants of the land between the Euphrates and the Tigris, and
which the Judæans of Palestine and of the Persian provinces used also
for the ordinary purposes of every-day life. In order to distinguish
it from the old writing, the new style was called the Assyrian (Khetab
Ashurith), because it had arisen in one of the Assyrian provinces. The
Samaritans, animated by a spirit of contradiction, retained the old
Hebrew characters for their Pentateuch, only in order to be able to
reproach their opponents with having introduced a forbidden innovation
and falsified the Torah. Until the present day, their holy writ exists
in these old-fashioned characters, and it is a closed book even to most
of their priests.
Owing to the regular reading of the Law and to its accessibility,
there arose among the Judæans an intellectual activity which gradually
gave a peculiar character to the whole nation. The Torah became their
spiritual and intellectual property, and their own inner sanctuary.
At this time there sprang up another important institution, namely,
schools for young men, where the text of the Law was taught, and love
for its teachings and principles cultivated. The intellectual leaders
of the people continually enjoined on the rising generation, "Bring
up a great many disciples." And what they enjoined so strenuously on
others they themselves must have zealously laboured to perform. One of
these religious schools (Beth-Waad) was established in Jerusalem. The
teachers were called scribes (Sopherim) or wise men; the disciples,
pupils of the wise (Talmide Chachamim). The wise men or scribes had a
twofold activity: on the one hand, to explain the Torah, and on the
other, to make the laws applicable both to individual and communal
life. This supplementary interpretation was called "exposition"
(Midrash); it was not arbitrary, but rested upon certain rules laid
down for the proper interpretation of the Law. The supreme council and
the houses of learning worked together, and one completed the other.
The result was a most important mental development, which impressed
upon the descendants of the patriarchs a new characteristic so
strongly as to make it seem second nature in them: the impulse to
investigate, to interpret, and to tax their ingenuity in order to
discover some new and hidden meaning either in the word or the
substance. The supreme council, the source of these institutions and
this new movement, did not confine itself to the interpretation of the
existing laws, and to their application to daily life, but it also drew
up its own code of laws, which were to regulate, to stimulate and to
strengthen the religious and social life of the people. There was an
old maxim of great repute in Judæa: "Make a fence about the Law." By
this maxim the teacher of the Law was directed to forbid certain things
in themselves permissible, which, however, touched too closely upon
the forbidden points, or might be confounded with them. This method
of guarding against any possible infringement of the Law, by means of
a "fence" (Seyag), had its justification in the careless, unsettled
habits of those early days. It was absolutely necessary that the mass
of the people, who were wholly uneducated, should accustom themselves
to the performance of the precepts and duties enjoined by the Law.
An entire set of laws, made for the purpose of preventing the violation
of the commands of the Torah, belong to the Sopheric age. For instance,
the degrees of relationship considered unlawful for matrimony were
increased in number; to prevent the violation of chastity, men were
forbidden to hold private interviews with married women in solitary
places. The loose way in which the Sabbath was observed in Nehemiah's
age was replaced by an extraordinarily rigid observance of the
Sabbath. In order to prevent any possible violation of the Sabbath
or of the festival days, all work was to cease before sunset on the
preceding evening, and an official was appointed to proclaim, by the
blast of a horn, the proper hour for repose. But the Sabbath day and
the festivals were intended to create a feeling of both devotion
and exaltation in the observers of the Law, and to banish from their
memory the cares and the troubles of the working days. It was partly to
express this that it became a custom in those days to drink a goblet
of wine at the coming in and at the going out of the festivals, and to
pronounce a blessing upon them, at their commencement declaring that
these days are holy, and sanctified by God (Kiddush), and at their
close, that they have a peculiar significance in contradistinction
to the working days (Habdalah). By laws such as these, which were
not permitted to remain a dead letter, the Sabbath acquired a holy
character.
The first evening of the Paschal feast, falling in the spring time,
was also invested with peculiar importance. It was intended to arouse
every year and to keep alive a grateful remembrance of the deliverance
from Egypt, and the consciousness of being in possession of precious
freedom. It became either a law or a custom to drink four glasses of
wine upon this festival of rejoicing, and even the poorest managed
to obtain the draught "that rejoices the heart." On the eve of the
Passover, the members of each family, with their most intimate friends,
gathered round the table, not to indulge in a luxurious meal, but to
thank and praise the God of their fathers; they ate bitter herbs, broke
unleavened bread, tasted some of the paschal lamb in commemoration of
their freedom, and drank the four goblets of wine to celebrate this
bright festival with a cheerful heart. Gradually the custom arose for
several families to celebrate the Paschal eve in common, the whole
assembly (Chaburah) to partake of the lamb, amid the singing of psalms.
The Paschal eve became in time a delightful family festival.
The prayers prescribed on Sopheric authority had no hard and fast
form, but the line of thought which they were to contain was, in
general, laid down. The form of prayer used in the Temple became the
model of the services in all prayer-houses, or houses of gathering
(Beth-ha-Keneseth). Divine service was performed at early morning in a
court of the Temple, and commenced with one or more specially selected
psalms of praise and thanksgiving. At the conclusion of the psalms,
the whole congregation exclaimed: "Praise be to the God of Israel, who
alone doeth wonders, and praised be the glory of His name for ever and
ever, and may His glory fill the whole earth"; upon which followed a
prayer of thanksgiving for the light of the sun, which God had given
to the whole world, and for the light of the Law, which He had given
to Israel. This was succeeded by the reading of several portions from
the Torah, the Ten Commandments and the Schema: "Hear, O Israel,
the Lord our God, the Lord is one," to which the whole congregation
responded: "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom for ever
and ever." The principal prayer, the Tephillah, was composed of six
short parts: a thanksgiving that God had chosen the children of Israel
as His servants; an acknowledgment of the Divine Power, as shown in
nature, by the life-giving rain, and as manifested in man, by the
future resurrection of the dead; an acknowledgment of the holiness of
God; a supplication for the accomplishment of all prayers and for the
acceptance of sacrifice; a thanksgiving for the preservation of life,
and finally a prayer for peace, following the blessing of the priest.
In the afternoon and evening, the congregation assembled again for
prayer, but the service was short, as the Psalms and chapters of the
Law were omitted.
On the Sabbath and festive days, the morning service was not materially
different, except that a particular prayer was interpolated, in which
special mention was made of the sanctity of the day, and a longer
portion from the Torah was read at its close. In time a portion from
the prophets, especially a chapter bearing upon the character of
the day, was read. The opposition in which the Judæans stood to the
Samaritans prompted this reading from the prophets. For the Samaritans
who denied the sanctity of the Temple and of Jerusalem, rejected the
prophetical writings, because they contained constant allusions to the
holy city and the chosen sanctuary. So much the more necessary did
it appear to the upholders of Judaism to publish these writings. In
consequence of this regulation, the words of the prophets who had but
rarely been listened to while they lived, were now read in every Judæan
house of prayer, and though they were but partially understood by the
greater number of the congregation, nevertheless they became mighty
levers to arouse the enthusiasm of the nation. As these readings ended
the morning service, they were called "the conclusion" (Haphtarah).
It thus became necessary to make an authoritative collection of the
prophetic writings, and to decide which of the books were to be
excluded, and which adopted. This choice was probably made by the
legislative body of the Sopheric age. The collection embraced the four
historical books, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, which were called
the Earlier Prophets; then came three books, great in interest, bearing
the names of the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and lastly the
twelve minor prophets, Hosea, Amos, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum,
Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zachariah, and Malachi, these twelve, in
conjunction with the three greater, being styled the Later Prophets.
These works were all recognised as Holy Writ, but were placed next to
the Torah, as of secondary degree of holiness.
In this way the divine service of the Sopheric age was constructed;
it was simple and edifying; it contained nothing superfluous,
disturbing or wearying, and it embodied the thought and spirit of
those time-honoured treasures, the writings of the prophets and
the psalmists. It contained only one foreign element, the belief in
the resurrection of the dead on the last day. With this exception,
everything was taken from the pure spring of the earliest teachings.
The inhabitants of the country towns introduced in their own
congregations an exact copy of the divine service as it was conducted
in Jerusalem. They needed no urging to this by mandatory enactments.
Thus in each town, houses of prayer (Synagogues, Moăde-El) were
established, in which was introduced the order of prayer which is
the groundwork of the divine service of the present day. Besides the
prayers, sacrifices were offered up according to the letter of the
Law. These two forms of divine service were blended into one; they
completed and helped one another. The spiritual service adapted itself
to the sacrificial ceremonies; three times during the day, whilst the
priests were offering up their sacrifices, the congregations assembled
in the prayer-houses, whereas on the Sabbath and on festivals, when
special sacrifices were offered up in the Temple (Korban Mussaph), the
congregation assembled four times for prayer (Tephillath Mussaph). But
even the sacrificial service could not shut out the living word; it had
to grow, as it were, more spiritual, and it became customary to sing
the Psalms at intervals between the offerings, because of the great
influence which this sublime poetry possessed.
There was, however, one very prominent feature connected with the
Temple and the sacrifices, which was opposed to the essentially
spiritual tendency of the prophetic and psalmistic poetry. It was that
which related to the laws concerning purity and impurity. The law
of the Torah had certainly given very precise regulations on these
matters; an unclean person could not bring offerings, or approach the
sanctuary, or even taste consecrated food. There were many degrees
of uncleanness, and the Law prescribed how unclean persons might be
purified. The last act of purification always consisted in bathing
in fresh running water. These laws would never have attained such
far-reaching importance, involving every station in life, had it
not been for the sojourn of the Judæans, during so many centuries,
among the Persians, whose much more stringent purification laws were
rigorously observed. The statutes concerning uncleanness, according to
the Iranian Avesta of the Persians, whose priests were the Magi, were
extremely strict, and the means adopted for purification revolting.
Dwelling among the Magi, the Judæans absorbed much from them. The
striking resemblance of many of their laws and customs to their
own could not escape their observation, and they yielded to Magian
influences.
The fundamental conception of the Deity, as of one incorporeal perfect
God, was so firmly implanted in the heart of every Judæan, that no
one would allow himself to be influenced by the conception of the
Persian god of light, Ahura-Mazda (Ormuzd), however spiritual that
conception might be. Their seers, full of penetration, speedily divined
the error of the Iranian doctrine of acknowledging two great rival
powers, the god of light and goodness, and the god of darkness and
sin, Angro-Mainyus (Ahriman). They contrasted that doctrine with their
own belief, that the God of Israel created light and darkness, good
and evil. They denied that the world and mankind are being perpetually
drawn in divergent directions by two rival powers, but are destined
to live in peace and unity. The spiritual leaders of the Judæans in
the Sopheric age expressed this belief in one of the morning prayers:
"God is the Creator of light and of darkness, He has created peace and
has made everything." But although the Judæans resisted any alteration
in their conception of the Deity, still they could not prevent many
of the ideas and customs of the Persians from gaining ground among
the nation. They imagined that they were adding to the glory of God
if, in imitation of the Iranians, they surrounded Him with myriads of
obedient servants. The "messengers of God," whom we read of in the
Bible as executors of His will, became, after the pattern of Persian
beliefs, heavenly creatures, endowed with peculiar characteristics
and special individuality. The people pictured to themselves the
divine throne, surrounded by a countless throng of heavenly beings,
or angels, awaiting a sign to do the bidding of God. "Thousand times
thousands served Him, and myriad times myriads stood before Him."
Like the Persians, the Judæans called the angels "the holy watchers"
(Irin-Kadishin). The angels received special names: Michael, Gabriel,
the strong, Raphael, the healer, Uriel or Suriel, Matatoron, and others.
As fancy had changed the Yazatas into angels, and given them a Hebrew
character and Hebrew names, so also were the bad spirits, or Daevas,
introduced among the Judæans. Satan was a copy of Angro-Mainyus, but he
was not placed in juxtaposition to the God of Israel, for this would
have been a denial of the fundamental doctrine of the Judæans. He,
the Holy One, high and mighty and all-powerful, could not be limited,
or in any way interfered with by one of His own creatures. Still the
first step had been taken, and, in the course of time, Satan grew to
be as strong and powerful as his Iranian prototype, and was endowed
with a kingdom of darkness of his own, where he reigned as the supreme
power of evil. Once created in the image of Angro-Mainyus, Satan had
to be surrounded with a host of attendant demons or evil spirits
(Shedim, Mazikim, Malache Chabalah). One demon, as an adaptation of
the Iranian Daeva names, was called Ashmodai; another, by the name of
Samael, was at the head of a troop of persecuting spirits. The angel
of death (Malach-ham Maveth), lying in ambush, ready to seize upon
men's lives, was endowed with a thousand eyes. These creatures of the
imagination soon took firm hold of the Jewish soul, and with them many
usages resembling those of the Magi invaded the Jewish religion; and
especially the laws of purification became more and more rigorous.
It was also at that time that a new doctrine of retribution was
developed in Judaism. According to the Iranian doctrine, the universe
was divided into two great kingdoms; that of light and that of
darkness; the pure, or worshippers of Ahura-Mazda, were admitted
into the region of light (Paradise), and the wicked, the followers
of Angro-Mainyus, into the kingdom of darkness (Hell). After death,
the soul remained during three days near the body it had tenanted;
then, according to its life upon earth, it was taken by the Yazatas
to Paradise, or was drawn down by the Daevas into Hell. This idea of
retribution after death was adopted by the Judæans. The Garden of Eden
(Gan-Eden), where the story of the Creation placed the first human
beings whilst they lived in a state of innocence, was transformed into
Paradise, and the Valley of Hinnom (Ge-Hinnom), in which, since the
days of Ahaz, sacrifices of children had been offered up, gave the name
to the newly-created Hell. In what way could such new beliefs have
crept into the Judæan faith? That is as little capable of demonstration
as is the way in which the pores of the skin become impregnated with a
disease that has poisoned the atmosphere. However, these views about
angels and Satan with his attendant spirits, about Paradise and Hell,
never obtained the dignity of fixed dogmas which it would be mortal
sin to doubt, but on the contrary, during that time, and in all future
time, their adoption or repudiation was left to the discretion of
the individual. Only one belief emanating from the Iranian religion,
that of the resurrection of the dead, became part of the spiritual
life of the Judæans, until it grew at last to be a binding dogma. The
Magi had taught and insisted upon this doctrine. They believed that
the re-awakening of the dead would take place at a future day, when
Ahura-Mazda will have conquered and destroyed his rival, when the god
of darkness will have to give up the bodies of the "pure men" which he
has stolen. The Judaism of the Sopheric age adopted this hopeful and
inspiriting doctrine all the more readily, as allusions to it existed
in the Judaic writings. The prophets had constantly made references
to the day of the last judgment, and the scribes, inferring that the
resurrection of the dead was meant, made it an article of faith amongst
their people, and in the daily prayer, praise was rendered to God for
awakening the dead to life.
At a later day, when the Judæan nation was struggling with death, a
seer, comforting the sufferers, said:--
"Many of those who are sleeping in dust will awake, some to
eternal life, and some to disgrace and everlasting abhorrence."
(DANIEL xii. 2.)
In this manner a peculiar doctrine of retaliation, with a brilliant
picture of the future, or of the next world (Olam ha-Ba), was evolved.
A magical world unfolded itself to the eye, intoxicating the believer.
He saw the time come when all discords of life would change into
harmony, when all disappointments would vanish, when the pious, the
faithful, and the just, who had suffered so much upon earth, would rise
from their graves and enter on eternal life in innocence and purity.
Even the sinners who had erred only from frivolity and weakness would
be purified by penitence in Hell, and would enjoy the pleasures of
eternal life. But how was this resurrection to take place, and how was
this beautiful new world to be organised? Imagination could not find an
answer to such a question. Fervent faith and enthusiastic hope do not
indulge in subtle inquiries; they are contented with giving the pious
the comforting assurance that a just recompense is in store for them,
in a future life, and thus assuaging the sorrows of an unhappy earthly
existence. Although Judaism received the essence of this teaching from
without, yet the power of enriching it, and of endowing it with the
faculty of working immeasurable good came from within. The foreign
origin of this belief becoming finally obliterated, it was considered
as an original Judæan doctrine. Only the Samaritans objected, for a
considerable time, to the belief in the resurrection and to the idea of
a future life.
During this long period of nearly two hundred years, while the Judæan
community established itself, and Judaism developed by the enlargement
of its own doctrines and the adoption of foreign elements--from the
death of Nehemiah to the destruction of the Persian kingdom--we do not
find a single personage mentioned who assisted in that great work,
which was to outlive and defy the storms of ages. Was it from excess
of modesty that the spiritual leaders of the people, with whom the new
order of things had originated, veiled themselves in obscurity, in
order to eliminate from their work every vestige of individualism? Or
is it the ingratitude of posterity that has effaced these names? Or,
again, were the members of the Great Council not sufficiently gifted or
remarkable to merit any particular distinction, and was the community
indebted for its vigour, and Judaism for its growth and development,
entirely to the zeal of a whole community, in which every individual
will was completely absorbed? Whatever was the cause, the astonishing
fact remains, that of these long stretches of time but few details
have become known to us. Either no annals were kept of the events of
those years, or they have been lost. It is true there were no very
remarkable events to describe, the activity of the Judæan community
being entirely restricted to its inward life; there was nothing which
might have appeared of sufficient importance to be chronicled for
posterity. There was indeed but little for the historian to write
about: a stranger might perhaps have been struck by the changes which
were gradually unfolding themselves, but to those who lived and worked
in the community, what was there of a peculiar or extraordinary nature
which might deserve to be perpetuated in history?
The Judæan people occupied themselves almost entirely with peaceful
avocations; they understood but little of the use of arms; perhaps not
even enough to preserve their own territories against the attacks of
their neighbours. The prophet Ezekiel had described what the condition
of the Jews would be after their return from captivity:
"In the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is
turned away from the sword and is gathered out of many people
against the mountains of Israel." (EZEK. xxxviii. 8.)
A peaceful, quiet existence naturally withdraws itself from curious
observation. In the wars which were often raging on their borders, the
Judæan people certainly took no part. Under Artaxerxes II., surnamed
Mnemon (404-362), and under Artaxerxes III., surnamed Ochus (361-338),
leaders of the discontented Egyptians, some of whom called themselves
kings, endeavoured to free their country from the Persian yoke, and
to restore it to its former independence. In order to be enabled to
offer effectual resistance to the armies collected for the purpose
of putting down these insurrections, the ephemeral kings of Egypt
joined the Persian satraps of Phœnicia, to whom Judæa had also been
allotted. Persian troops often passed along the Judæan coasts of the
Mediterranean towards Egypt, or Egyptians towards Phœnicia, and Greek
mercenaries, hired by either power, marched to and fro, and all this
warlike array could be constantly observed by the Judæans from their
mountain-tops. They did not always remain mere passive spectators;
for, though they were not compelled to join the armies, they were
certainly not exempt from various charges and tributes. The relations
between the Judæans and the Persians was at the same time somewhat
disturbed. The latter, influenced by foreign example, began to practise
idolatry. The goddess of love, who, under the different names of
Beltis, Mylitta, or Aphrodite, was constantly brought under the notice
of the Persians, exercised a fascinating power over them. The victories
they had achieved and the riches they had acquired, inclined them to
sensual pleasures, and they were easily enthralled by the goddess, and
induced to serve and worship her. As soon as they had adopted this new
deity, they gave her a Persian name, Anahita, Anaitis, and included
her in their mythology. Artaxerxes II. sanctioned her worship, and had
images of her placed everywhere in his great kingdom, in the three
principal cities, Babylon, Susa, and Ecbatana, as well as in Damascus,
Sardes, and in all the towns of Persia and Bactria. Through this
innovation the Persian religion sustained a double injury. A strange
deity was admitted, and image-worship introduced. Thus the spiritual
link which had bound the Persians to the followers of Judaism--their
common abhorrence of idolatry--was broken. No longer was "pure incense"
offered to the incorporeal God of the Judæans. Having compelled his own
people to bow down to this newly adopted goddess of love, Artaxerxes
tried, as it appears, to force her worship upon the Judæans; the latter
were cruelly treated, in order to make them renounce their religion,
but they chose the severest punishments, and even death itself, rather
than abjure the faith of their fathers. It is related that after his
war with the Egyptians and their king Tachos (361-360), Artaxerxes
banished many Judæans from their country, and sent them to Hyrkania,
on the shores of the Caspian Sea. If this account may be considered
historical, the banishment of the Judæans must surely have been a
mode of persecution inflicted upon them on account of their fidelity
to their laws and their God; for it is hardly to be supposed that they
took part in the revolt against Persia, which was then spreading from
Egypt to Phœnicia. In Jerusalem there was much suffering at that time,
caused by one of those abject creatures, who, owing to the growing
degeneracy of the Persian Court and increasing weakness of the kingdom,
raised themselves from the dust, and ruled both the countries and the
throne. This was the eunuch Bagoas (Bagoses), who under Artaxerxes
III. became so powerful that he was able to set aside the king, and
fill the throne according to his own pleasure. Before attaining this
supreme position, Bagoas had been the commander of the troops stationed
in Syria and Phœnicia, and he had taken advantage of the opportunities
thus offered him to acquire great riches. He received bribes from
Joshua, the ambitious son of the high-priest, who hoped thus to secure
that post for himself. Joshua had an elder brother, Johanan, and both
were sons of Joiada, one of whose relations, having connected himself
with Sanballat, had been banished from Jerusalem by Nehemiah, and
subsequently had introduced the rival worship on Mount Gerizim. After
the death of Joiada, the younger son, trusting in the countenance of
Bagoas, came forward to seize the high-priest's diadem. The elder
brother was enraged at this presumption, and a struggle, which ended
in bloodshed, took place between the two in the Temple itself. Johanan
slew Bagoas's protégé in the Sanctuary. A sad omen for the future! Upon
hearing what had occurred at Jerusalem, the eunuch instantly proceeded
thither, not to avenge the death of Joshua, but, under the pretext of
meting out well-deserved punishment, to extort money for himself. For
each lamb that was offered at the daily services in the Temple, the
people were ordered to pay 50 drachms as expiatory money, and this
sum was to be paid every morning before the sacrifice was performed.
Bagoas also violated the law which forbade any layman's entering the
Sanctuary, and when the priest, in accordance with the prohibitory
decree, tried to prevent his entrance into the Temple, he asked,
mockingly, if he was not so pure as the son of the high-priest, who had
been murdered there?
The people paid the expiatory money for seven years, when, for some
reason, they were freed from their burden. The disfavour into which
the Judæan nation had fallen with the last Persian king was turned
to account by their malevolent neighbours, the Samaritans, in order
to injure them to their utmost power. They appear to have regained
by force or cunning the border districts of Ramathaim, Apherema and
Lydda, which they had formerly been obliged to quit. The Judæans were
now reduced to a struggle for mere existence. Few and brief had been
the glimpses of light which had brightened the annals of the Judæan
community during the last two hundred years! This light had illumined
the first enthusiastic days of the return from captivity during the
reign of Darius, who showered favours upon them, and during the time
of Nehemiah's presence and zealous activity at Jerusalem. With these
exceptions, their lot had been oppression, poverty and pitiable
helplessness. They appear to us in their sadness and misery to be
ever asking with tearful, uplifted eyes, "Whence shall help come to
us?" and traces of this helplessness and misery are visible in the
writings that have come down from that period. While the exile lasted,
the grief and the longing, which kept the captives in constant and
breathless expectation, had brought forth the fairest blossoms of
prophecy and poetry; but as soon as the excitement ceased, and hope
became a reality, the mental and poetical activity began to sink. The
later prophetical utterances, if beauty of form be considered, cannot
bear comparison with those of the Captivity. The poetry of the Psalms
became weak and full of repetitions, or else borrowed the bloom of
older productions. The graceful idyl of the book of Ruth forms an
exception in the literature of this period. Historical writings were,
from causes easy to explain, completely neglected. Ezra and Nehemiah
had given only a short and unpolished account of the occurrences they
had witnessed. Quite at the end of this epoch, towards the close of the
Persian dominion, it appears that a Levite compiled an historical work
(Chronicles), narrating the events from the Creation down to his own
time.
But during the life of the author of the annals, or shortly after he
had finished his history, a new period dawned, which gave rise to fresh
mental exertions among the Judæans, and brought forth proofs of their
capacity and worth. This new period was ushered in by the Greeks. They
wrought a thorough change in the manners, customs and thoughts of
other nations, and materially raised the degree of civilisation among
the various peoples then known in the world. However, the diffusion
of this civilisation, which was the consequence of the acquisition of
political power and widespread conquest, was owing, not to a purely
Greek race, but to a mixed people of Greeks and Barbarians, namely, the
Macedonians. The grace and charm of the Greeks have caused their faults
to be leniently regarded by mankind, but they were not overlooked by
the Ruler of the world, and their sins brought retributive punishment
upon them. Advantage was easily taken of their mutual jealousies,
their many foibles, their restless, unruly disposition, and Greece was
apt to fall a prey to any ambitious leader who was an adept in the
art of intoxicating flattery, lavish with his gold, and supported by
martial force. Such was the case with Philip, king of Macedonia, who
dazzled all with his cunning and his wealth, his valour and his army.
All Greece lay at his feet. But even now when the king proposed, as a
satisfaction to their national pride, that a war should be undertaken
against Persia, in which they might at once punish the latter for
inroads upon their country, and win fame and booty for themselves,
petty feelings of jealousy continued to exist among the people, and
to prevent common action. Some of the States could not be influenced,
and refused to send delegates to the assembly; whilst other States,
or their representatives, had to be bribed to give their consent to
the proposed plan. Philip's project of war against Persia was cut
short by the hand of an assassin. Then appeared his son, the great
Alexander, who was destined to remodel entirely the relations of the
various countries, and to draw the peaceful inhabitants of Judæa into
the vortex of the great world conflicts. New troubles and new trials
were brought upon the Judæan people by the convulsions felt from one
end of the known world to the other. A Judæan seer compared Alexander
to a leopard endowed with the wings of an eagle. In two battles he gave
to the rotten Persian monarchy its deathblow; Asia Minor, Syria, and
Phœnicia lay at his feet, and kings and princes, attired in all their
pomp, did homage to the conqueror. Tyre and Gaza, the one after a seven
months', the other after a two months' siege, were both taken (August
and November, 332), and met with a cruel fate.
How did the insignificant dominion of Judæa fare with the invincible
hero before whom Egypt, the proud land of the Pharaohs, had fallen
humbly prostrate? The historical records of those times have come
down to us only in the form of legends, and consequently give us no
authentic account of the passing events. It is scarcely credible that
the Judæans were prevented from doing homage to Alexander through
fear of incurring any guilt by breaking their oath to their Persian
rulers. They had never taken such an oath of fealty, but even if they
had, after their treatment by the last Persian kings, they would not
have felt much remorse in breaking it. There is no doubt that the
story of Alexander's approach to Jerusalem, and the favours which he
heaped upon the Judæans in consequence of a peculiar vision, rests
upon a legend. The High Priest, so it is related, dressed in his holy
garments, followed by a troop of priests and Levites, went forth to
meet the youthful warrior, and produced so great and extraordinary an
effect upon him, that his anger was at once changed into kindness and
good will. The explanation given by Alexander to his followers was
that the High Priest thus attired had appeared to him in a dream which
he had had in Macedonia, and had promised him victory. According to
one legend, it was the High Priest Jaddua, according to another, his
grandson Simon, who produced this effect upon the Macedonian hero. In
reality, the meeting between Alexander and the envoys of the Judæan
community no doubt passed simply and naturally enough. The High Priest,
perhaps Onias I., Jaddua's son and Simon's father, went forward, like
the kings and princes of the land, with a suite of the elders, to do
homage and swear allegiance to the conqueror. Alexander was a noble,
generous conqueror, who punished cruelly only resistance to his will,
but in no way interfered with the peculiar development, the customs,
or religious rites of any nation under his sway. He did not force
the Grecian faith on any nation, and the favour which he granted to
other nations he certainly did not deny to the Judæans. They were only
obliged to pay the Macedonian governor the same tax on their lands as
the Persian satrap had received.
The first meeting of Greece and Judæa, both of which were, in different
ways, to offer civilisation to the world, was of a friendly character,
although the one appeared in all her glory and might, the other in her
weakness and humility.--Judæa became part of a province, which was
bounded on the north by Mount Taurus and Mount Lebanon, and on the
south by Egypt, and was called Hollow Syria (Cœlesyria), to distinguish
it from the Higher Syria, which lay in the neighbourhood of the
Euphrates. The governor of this extensive province, which had formerly
been divided into many independent states, resided in Samaria, from
which we may infer that it was a fortified and populous town. Samaria,
however, was indebted for this preference or dangerous station to
its situation in the centre of the province and in a fertile region.
Andromachos was the name of the governor whom Alexander placed over
the Cœlesyrians. Why were the Samaritans displeased with this apparent
distinction? Did they feel themselves hampered in their movements by
the presence of the Governor, or was their anger roused by jealousy
at the favour shown by Alexander to the Judæans, whom they hated so
bitterly? The violent resentment of the Samaritans, or at least of
their leaders, went so far that, heedless of the consequences, they
rose up against Andromachos, seized him and consigned him to the flames
(331). Alexander's wrath, upon hearing of this act of atrocity which
had been committed upon one of his generals, was as great as it was
just. Had this small, insignificant people dared defy one who had
subdued all Egypt, the proud priests of which country had prostrated
themselves before him, proclaiming his pre-eminence and his glory?
Upon his return from Egypt, while hastening to conquer Persia, he
hurried to Samaria to avenge the murder of Andromachos. The authors
of the horrible deed were put to death under cruel tortures, another
governor called Memnon was placed over Samaria, and the town was filled
with Macedonians. In various other ways, Alexander appears to have
mortified and humiliated the Samaritans, and knowing that they were
enemies of the Judæans, he favoured the latter in order to mark his
displeasure towards the former. Several border lands lying between
Samaria and Judæa, which had often occasioned strife between the two
peoples, he awarded to the Judæans, and likewise freed the latter
from the burden of taxation during the Sabbatical year. This favour,
of small importance to him who gave it, was a great boon to those who
received it, and inflamed the hatred of the Samaritans against the
Judæans; every gust of wind seemed to add new fuel to their enmity,
which, however, as long as Alexander lived, they were obliged to
conceal. His wonderfully rapid and victorious campaigns--as far as the
Indus and the Caucasus--seemed to throw a spell over the world, and to
paralyse all independent action. When he was not at war, peace reigned
supreme, from Greece to India, and from Ethiopia to the shores of the
Caspian sea. Alexander was the first conqueror who deemed it a wise
policy to allow the peculiar customs of any conquered nation to be
maintained; he insisted that respect should be shown to their various
religious forms of worship. In Egypt he honoured Apis and Ammon, and
in Babylonia the gods of Chaldæa. Thus he determined upon rebuilding
the temple of the Babylonian idol Bel, which had been destroyed by
Artaxerxes. To accomplish this, he ordered his soldiers to clear away
the ruins which had accumulated over the foundations of the building.
All obeyed with the exception of the Judæans who, either voluntarily
or by compulsion, were serving in his army. They refused their help
towards the reconstruction of the idolatrous temple. Naturally enough,
their disobedience received severe chastisement from their superior
officers, but they bore their punishment bravely, rather than comply
with an order which demanded the transgression of one of the principal
injunctions of their faith. When Alexander heard of this case of
conscience and of the religious fortitude displayed by the Judæan
soldiers, he was generous enough to grant them his pardon. But in that
incident we may read an omen of the conflicts which were to take place
between Judaism and Greekdom.
In the midst of his vast undertaking--that of uniting the whole world
into one monarchy--the young hero died (323), leaving no lawful heir
to his throne, no successor to his great mind. Confusion arose in all
parts of the world, as well as among the armies of Alexander,--dire
as if the laws of Nature had been upset, and the sequence of the
morrow after to-day were no longer certain. Fearful battles, which
resembled the wars of the Titans, ensued. Alexander's warriors, with
the experience gained on a thousand battle-fields, would, had they
only been united, have been capable of supporting the structure of the
Macedonian kingdom; but, although they were not actually Greeks, and
even looked down upon the latter, they resembled them in their spirit
of insubordination, their want of discipline, and their passion for
self-advancement, which greatly surpassed their zeal for the good of
the State. Like the Greeks, they coveted power as a means to obtain
luxuries and to enable them to indulge in licentious pleasures; in
short, they had become adepts in corrupt practices.
The consequence of this state of things was the dissolution of the
Macedonian kingdom and its division among the contending leaders.
Ptolemy I. Soter, son of Lagos, reigned in Egypt. By means of a
successful war he acquired Cœlesyria, together with Judæa. In 320, he
demanded the surrender of Jerusalem, but its inhabitants refused to
open their gates. On a Sabbath, however, he contrived to surprise the
city, and, as the Judæans would not use weapons of defence on that day,
he was able to seize the city and to make numerous prisoners, whom he
carried away to Egypt. Many Samaritans shared their fate, probably
because they had likewise attempted resistance. Both Judæans and
Samaritans could have enjoyed happiness--at least, as much happiness as
was possible in those hard, cruel times--had they remained subjects of
the Lagidian Ptolemy, who was the gentlest of the warring successors
of Alexander. He knew how to recognise and appreciate merit, and when
his own interests were not at stake, he was just and merciful; but
Ptolemy had no acknowledged right upon Cœlesyria. His acquisition
of those lands had not been confirmed by the various regents of the
Macedonian kingdom who followed each other in rapid succession, and
kept up the semblance of a united government. Ptolemy roused the envy
of the confederate captains, and in particular that of one of his
former allies and fellow-conspirators, Antigonus. This bold soldier
was endowed with inventive genius and a fiery nature, and had resolved
upon the subjection of all his associates, in order to seize and hold
the whole kingdom of Macedonia in his own strong hand. After many years
of warlike preparations, a decisive battle at last took place between
Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, and Ptolemy, which ended disastrously
for the former. The battle of Gaza, fought in the spring of 312, was a
memorable one, for from that event Seleucus, who had come as a fugitive
to Ptolemy, dated the beginning of his power by introducing the new
era called Seleucidæan, or Greek, which also came into use among the
Judæans, and was longest retained by them. In consequence of the defeat
at Gaza, Demetrius was obliged to withdraw to the north, leaving the
whole country to the conqueror. Only a short time elapsed, however,
before Antigonus and his son, having joined their forces, compelled
Ptolemy to retreat to Egypt. He caused the fortified sea-coast and
inland cities, Acco, Joppa, Gaza, and Jerusalem to be demolished,
so that they might not become places of defence to his enemies, and
Judæa, with the countries that belonged to Cœlesyria, remained in this
unguarded condition until, in the battle at Ipsus, in Asia Minor (301),
fought against the united armies of Ptolemy, Lysimachus, Cassander, and
Seleucus, Antigonus lost at one blow both his glory and his life. The
four generals divided the kingdom among themselves. Ptolemy received
Egypt and the adjoining lands, and the greater part of Asia fell to
Seleucus. Thus Judæa became a portion of the Ptolemæan or Lagidian
kingdom, and its fate for a time was linked to that of the latter. The
condition of the Judæans, however, underwent no material change. The
tribute they had been obliged formerly to pay to the Persian monarch
was now demanded by the Egypto-Macedonian court. The freedom and
independence of their movements and actions were not more restricted
than they had hitherto been; on the contrary, their situation might be
considered rather improved than otherwise.
In Judæa, the high-priest, who was answerable for the payment of
taxes, was considered as the political chief, and was looked upon as
a sacerdotal prince. Ptolemy I. was endowed with a gentle nature,
and inclined to benefit his subjects. He had neither desire nor
motive to oppress the Judæans. Alexandria, the seaport city founded
by Alexander, and considered as the capital of his kingdom by the
first Egypto-Macedonian monarch, acquired a large population, and it
could only be a source of satisfaction to him to see Judæans from the
neighbouring country establishing themselves there. Under Alexander,
many Judæans had settled in that city, and, as this far-seeing hero had
given equal rights of Macedonian citizenship to all comers, the first
Judæan colony in Alexandria enjoyed perfect equality with the other
inhabitants, and led a peaceful existence in the new land. A great
number of Judæans took up their abode there during the disturbed state
of their country, caused by the wars of Antigonus; they also received
from Ptolemy protection and the enjoyment of equal laws and rights. And
thus arose an Egypto-Judæan community, which was destined to fulfil a
peculiar mission. In other places also Judæan colonies were formed.
Assured of the good will of the Judæans, Ptolemy distributed them in
various Egyptian cities and in Cyrene.
Seleucus, the founder of the Seleucidæan kingdom, the centre of
which was situated in Persia, had in addition become possessed of
the northern part of Syria, where he founded a new city, Antioch,
which became his capital. In order to people this city, as well as
other newly-built towns, he was obliged to bring inhabitants into
them, and among these partly forced and partly willing settlers were
many Judæans, to whom Seleucus gave the full rights of Macedonian
citizenship. And, as Judæan colonies arose in the Græco-Macedonian
countries, so also Greek colonies were formed upon Judæan ground. Along
the Mediterranean coast new seaports were built, or old ones enlarged
and embellished, and to these Grecian names were given.