History of the Jews, Vol. 1 (of 6)

by Heinrich Graetz

Demetrius, upon hearing of Nicanor's defeat, had sent an immense army, commanded by the merciless Bacchides, to Judæa. This general marched through Galilee, killed all the Judæans whom he met on his way, and in the spring-time of the year encamped before Jerusalem. Judas had again been obliged to leave the capital, because, stripped as she was of her walls, she afforded no shelter. He issued a proclamation to the men and youths of Judæa to come forward and fight for their fatherland, their Law, and their freedom, but only 3,000 responded to the call. Led by Judas, these troops marched southward, encamping near Eleasa, because the mountains in the north were no longer safe. Bacchides followed the Judæan army with 20,000 foot and 2,000 mounted soldiers, taking up his position at Birath, near Bethlehem. Confronted with this vast host, the Judæan warriors lost heart. They declined to give battle for the moment, but insisted upon dispersing to await reinforcements. In vain did Judas employ all his eloquence to urge steadfastness upon them. The greater number deserted, leaving only eight hundred men to support Judas. Selecting the most valiant of this little band, he successfully attacked the right wing of Bacchides, and drove the enemy to the confines of Ashdod. But the small troop of Judæan soldiers left behind, unable to withstand the desperate onslaught of the left wing of the Syrian army, was routed, and when Judas returned from the pursuit he was obliged to resume battle with the latter. He and his band of picked men performed wonders of bravery. On both sides fell the dead and wounded, and the battle lasted from morning till evening. But the Judæan army became smaller and smaller, and its survivors were entirely surrounded by the enemy. At last even Judas Maccabæus fell, sword in hand. The few remaining soldiers fled from the battle-field, the Maccabæan brothers being fortunate enough to save the body of their heroic commander from disgrace.

The defeat at Eleasa or Birath (160) seemed to have rendered ineffectual all the previous Jewish victories. The lion-hearted troop of Hasmonæans were dispersed. Alcimus once more took possession of the Temple and the Holy City, and could gloat over his antagonists.

But the long years of Maccabæan warfare had not been in vain. They had roused the nation from its torpor, and had rejuvenated it. The blood of martyrs, it is said, heals wounds. In truth, all old wounds were healed by this free-will sacrifice of so many lives. So far as the world at large was concerned, the stigma that had been fastened upon the Judæan name had vanished. The contemptuous Greeks, who had felt the force of Judas's arm, no longer derided the Judæan soldiers, and the Judæans were no longer required to prove their equality with the Greeks by joining in the Olympian games. The Judæans themselves had learnt to know their own prowess and their mission; they had proved themselves to be God's people, destined to guard His law and His teaching, and capable of defending those precious gifts. Self-devotion, taught by the prophet Elijah to a few disciples, and inculcated by the second Isaiah with fiery eloquence, had become, through the action of the Maccabæan warriors and martyrs, the recognised duty of the whole nation.

Judas Maccabæus had breathed out his heroic soul on the battle-field of Eleasa. The whole nation mourned for him, and justly, for it had become orphaned by his loss.

The sublime enthusiasm that had led to the valiant deeds of the Maccabees, that had moved singers to extol the Lord "in new songs," could not be of lasting duration. It was the result of a noble excitement, and a reaction had to follow. An entire nation, bred to farming and cattle-breeding, cannot continue in arms from year's end to year's end. Besides, the principal cause which had prompted a warlike rising had ceased to exist. It was no longer demanded of them to deny the God of Israel, or to sacrifice to Jupiter. One of the terms of the truce that Judas Maccabæus had concluded with the young king Antiochus Eupator, or with his general-guardian Lysias, was the religious freedom of the Judæans. Demetrius I. did not interfere with this concession; in the Temple at Jerusalem, the sacrifices were offered up according to law, and although the high-priest, Jakim or Alcimus, was not a favourite of the people, yet, unlike his predecessor Menelaus, he came of priestly descent.

It is true, the party of the Hellenists still held the fortress Acra in Jerusalem, whence they menaced the faithful with the destruction of their city and the violation of their Temple. The conqueror, Bacchides, after the death of Judas, had made them masters of the land, and they were resolved to use their authority in order to bring about the downfall of the pious Judæans. But such proceedings, well as they may be adapted to rouse noble natures to active measures, do not seem important enough to warrant a short-sighted, and, above all things, peace-loving people to take any decided steps against their enemy, and to hazard their own safety and that of their families, unless a voice of authority calls upon them to act.

But after the death of Judas Maccabæus there was no one left to claim such authority.

Although the Hasmonæan brothers were beloved by the people, they had not the power to summon the whole nation to their standard, and they were looked upon only as leaders of a faction.

In fact, after the death of Judas one could discern the beginnings of three distinct parties amongst the people; party spirit, always a symptom of national vitality, had, as far as Judæa was concerned, its origin in the Maccabæan wars. First, there were the pious Chasidim, or Assidæans, as they are more generally called. These obeyed not only the Law, but the additional enactments promulgated by Ezra and the Supreme Council. Then came their persistent antagonists, the Hellenists, who, in violent contrast to the former, scorned the earnest Judæan life, and sought to introduce Greek customs. These were despised of the people, who called them "Traitors to the Covenant." In spite of this they numbered among their adherents Temple officials, priests, and the old and distinguished family of Odura, and the sons of Phasiron. Lastly, there were the Hasmonæans, who had raised themselves to great power in a short time, and whose leaders were the three remaining sons of Mattathias, Jonathan, Simeon and Johanan. The Hasmonæans resembled the Assidæans in their love for Judaism and the Sanctuary, but they differed from them in their wider view, in their practical judgment, and in their manly energy, which could not be deterred from its purpose by any adverse circumstances. They were not content with having averted the violation of the Sanctuary, or with having obtained the recognition of their religious liberty; but they longed to rid themselves of the causes which had brought misfortune on their country. A Psalmist describes them most accurately in these words: "The praise of God is in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hands." They could not bear to have the Judæans remain under the hateful yoke of the Greeks, or to know that Judaism depended for its very existence upon the whim of a Syrian despot, or the intrigues of a treacherous party. They were not content with mere religious freedom; they wished to establish political independence. But the Hasmonæans feared that they lacked the strength to effect this purpose. They therefore determined to rely upon extraneous aid, and for this purpose they desired to connect themselves with the Roman government and, it appears, also with the Parthians, who had freed themselves from Syrian rule. But it was this worldly policy that incensed the Assidæans. They put their trust in God alone, and could imagine warfare possible only if conducted according to Biblical precedent; they believed that God would confound the enemy in a miraculous way, and, in their opinion, to seek foreign help was to cast a doubt upon the omnipotence of God. "It is better to trust in the Lord than to confide in man," they quoted, "it is better to trust in the Lord than to confide in princes." This discontent, it may be surmised, was the cause of the separation of the Assidæans from the Hasmonæans, thereby reducing the number of the Maccabæan warriors. This circumstance may have brought about the death of Judas.

Of these three parties, the Hasmonæans alone had a chance of being ultimately the leaders of the nation. The Hellenists had destroyed their prospects by disregarding entirely the observances or prejudices of the people; whilst the Assidæans entertained views of an intensely narrow character, and were too fond of repose to disturb it by seeking to remedy the state of anarchy in which Judæa was plunged.