The Rise and Decline of the Hasmonean Dynasty

Seleucid Competitors Vie for Hasmonean Support 

In the years following the rededication of the Temple in 164 BCE, the Hasmoneans took advantage of the weakening Seleucid dynasty and its subsequent collapse to establish their own independent kingdom in Judea. After the death of Judah in 160 BCE, the people chose Jonathan, his younger brother, to be their leader. Having reassembled the scattered rebel forces, Jonathan executed military exploits in and around Judaea. Together, Jonathan and his brother Simon continued to expand their territory, bringing Judea closer to regaining its independence. 

Simon eventually conquered the fortresses of Judea, occupied Jaffa, and expanded their territory as far as Ashkelon, which belonged to their then-allies, the Ptolemies. According to 1 Maccabees, a battle erupts between Jonathan and the Seleucid general Bacchides, who had been responsible for the death of Judah. Jonathan manages to subdue but not entirely defeat the army of Bacchides. According to this account, Bacchides ultimately forged a treaty with Jonathan and after returning his Jewish prisoners left Judea permanently.

While Jonathan and Simon were expanding the territory they controlled in Judea, Demetrius I Soter (r. 161–150 BCE) and Alexander Balas (or Epiphanes), who claimed to be the son of Antiochus IV, were vying for the Seleucid throne. An account in 1 Maccabees 10 shows how the two competed with each other for the “friendship” of the Hasmoneans in the hopes of their military support. (First Maccabees leaves out the eight years between the withdrawal of Bacchides and the courtship of Balas and Demetrios. The remaining Hasmoneans were engaging in brigandage outside Judea, which 1 Maccabees actually mentions, but then it goes dark. Jonathan has in the meantime reassembled a faction in Judea.) The Seleucid pretenders were interested in Jonathan because he had manpower at his disposal, and they were willing to reward him with a high priesthood to which he had no legitimate claim. This competition for Hasmonean support signals both that the Hasmoneans had become more powerful than their opposition—Judean supporters of Hellenization—and that the Hasmoneans had become powerful enough to be desirable allies. 

Jonathan Becomes (a Controversial) High Priest

Ultimately Jonathan sided with Alexander Balas, who went on to defeat Demetrius in battle. In return, Alexander appointed Jonathan high priest in 152 BCE. Though the tradition of the Seleucid king naming the high priest went back to Antiochus’ appointment of Jason in 173 BCE, Alexander’s appointment of Jonathan in 152 BCE signaled a reversal of the earlier state of affairs. Now, Judean support was necessary to a Seleucid king.

The Seleucid appointment of Jonathan, the youngest of Mattathias’ sons, to the high priesthood meant that he now had official sanction to raise an army, which he did immediately, even before he attended to matters such as the rebuilding and strategic fortification of Jerusalem and its countryside that Josephus describes. While Jonathan’s role was highly traditional in that he was mainly expected to do the bidding of the king and collect taxes—as indeed he did—over time the office of the high priest situated political, military, and cultic power in one individual, a development that resulted in the fragmentation of the Judean population and the emergence of Jewish sectarianism during this period. Documents from Qumran (the Dead Sea Scrolls) suggest that the Essenes evolved as a group at least partly because they believed that the high priest ought to be a descendant of the line of Zadok, the first to serve in the First Temple in that capacity. The later rabbis also, as likely descendants of the Pharisees, disliked the concentration of power in the hands of the Hasmoneans, which may explain their reimagining of the miracle of Hanukkah as the miracle of the small container of oil lasting for eight days and their diminution of the Hasmonean military victory.

Jonathan’s Death, Simon’s Rise, and Hasmonean Independence

Josephus recounts that Trypho, a former friend of Alexander Balas, schemed to gain the throne from Antiochus VI. In this effort, he enticed the unarmed Jonathan into a meeting and took him hostage. Trypho then sought to have Jonathan killed. Jonathan’s brother Simon was appointed as Jonathan’s successor and made a rousing speech to restore the courage of the Jews. Though Simon attempted to secure Jonathan’s freedom, he was ultimately unsuccessful, and Jonathan was eventually executed in 142 BCE. Simon gave him a proper burial and erected a monument for his family. (Simon’s speech also appears in 1 Maccabees 13.)

After Jonathan’s death in 142 BCE, Simon (142–132 BCE) became high priest, and Simon’s negotiations with the Seleucid ruler Demetrius II (r. 146–139 BCE) afforded Simon more power. Among Simon’s early accomplishments were the conquest of Gezer and the Akra, the Seleucid fortress in Jerusalem. Simon was acclaimed ethnarch, army commander, and high priest, “until a trustworthy prophet should arise” (1 Maccabees 14:41). First Maccabees 14 describes Simon’s reign using tropes from biblical prophecy that anticipate an eschatological era of peace, with Simon at times depicted in messianic terms. This consolidation of power under the authority of a strong ruler reveals how the high priesthood came to be legitimized not by Zadokite descent but by political election.

It was during the reign of Simon that Demetrius II granted him several favors. Simon declared independence and then drove out the remnants of the Seleucid army. This was not recognized as a legitimate act by the Seleucids. It was also during his reign that a Great Assembly made Simon’s offices hereditary and thereby created the conditions that established the Hasmonean dynasty upon Simon’s death, when his son John Hyrcanus became the next leader of Judea. 

Josephus reports that while Antiochus VII Sidetes, also known as Antiochus Euergetes (r. 139–129 BCE), had previously recognized Simon as high priest and ethnarch over the Jews, the Seleucid ruler later conspired against the Jewish one. Simon responded by ambushing Antiochus’ men and forming an alliance with the Romans. In the end, an aging Simon was slain (ca. 135 BCE) in an act of treachery by his own son-in-law Ptolemy during a banquet held at the Dok fortress near Jericho. Simon’s son John Hyrcanus managed to escape and assume leadership.

John Hyrcanus I

John Hyrcanus ruled as ethnarch of Judea and high priest from 135 to 104 BCE. Josephus evaluates him positively, recounting that he “administered the government in the best manner.” He was quite active militarily, enduring a siege of Jerusalem at the hands of Antiochus VII Sidetes, coming to terms with him, and then supporting his campaign against the Parthians. 

Numismatic evidence shows that beginning around 111/110 BCE, Hyrcanus achieved Judea’s independence and undertook a project of territorial expansion, conquering a number of locales. Perhaps the most notable of these was Idumaea, the birthplace of Herod the Great, upon whose inhabitants he imposed a process of Judaization. He also renewed his treaty with Rome. Josephus also reports that because Cleopatra (Cleopatra III, r. 142–131 BCE) was warring with her son Ptolemy (Ptolemy IX Soter, also called Lathyrus; r. 116–107 BCE and 88–81 BCE), the Jews in Egypt occupied a favorable position. Indeed, Jews in Jerusalem and throughout Judea, Alexandria, and Cyprus enjoyed a period of relative stability.

Toward the end of his account of Hyrcanus’ reign, Josephus relates that Hyrcanus was initially a follower of the Pharisees. However, after a confrontation during which his legitimacy as both political leader and high priest was challenged, he was convinced to go over to the Sadducees, a more elitist group with less popular support. This narrative likely reflects the increasing political-religious opposition among some Jewish sects to the militant Hasmonean dynasty during Jonathan’s reign. Perhaps the Pharisees saw little distinction between the regime of Hyrcanus and that of the previously ruling Seleucids.

Aristobulus I

John Hyrcanus had intended that upon his death his wife would assume the political leadership of Judea and his son Aristobulus would serve as high priest. Aristobulus was unsatisfied with that arrangement, and when John Hyrcanus died, he assumed the title of king. He was cruel to his mother and brothers and allowed his mother to die of starvation in prison. He initially shared power with his most beloved brother, Antigonus, but in a series of mostly tragic misunderstandings, he arranged to have his brother murdered. As a result, his own fatal illness worsened, and he died after reigning for only one year, 104–103 BCE. 

Aristobulus is remembered as a Hellenizer; Josephus refers to him as philhellene (“friend of the Greeks”), signaling further the Hasmonean adoption of Greek ways. Like his father before him, Aristobulus I militaristically expanded the kingdom and forced the Itureans to the north, his newly subject people, to Judaize and circumcise.

Alexander Janneus 

Alexander Janneus, known as Yannai in Hebrew, became the second Hasmonean to claim the title of king of Judaea, ruling from 103 to 76 BCE. He inherited the throne after the short reign of his brother Aristobulus I and married Aristobulus’ widow, Queen Salome Alexandra, who upon her husband’s death released his imprisoned brothers and placed Alexander Janneus on the throne. According to Josephus, Janneus had the strongest claim to the throne and appeared at the time to be moderate. Yet when he came to power, Alexander killed another of his brothers who aspired to the throne. Josephus goes on to depict a brutal, deeply unpopular, and tyrannical ruler engaged in substantial territorial expansion.

Hasmonean Territorial Expansions

The realm of the Hasmoneans expanded beyond Judea, a process that began with John Hyrcanus (r. 134–104 BCE), who, starting around 110 BCE (not 129 BCE, as Josephus thought), conquered Samaria, Idumaea, and parts of the Transjordan. (See the map Rise and Fall of the Hasmonean Dynasty.) This was followed by the conquest of the Galilee during the brief reign of his son Aristobulus I (104–103 BCE), the first of the Hasmoneans to employ the title of king (though this has not been confirmed numismatically; according to the coins, the first king was Alexander Yannai). Finally, Aristobulus’ brother, Alexander Janneus (or Yannai; r. 103–76 BCE), seized control of nearly all the Palestinian coastal cities. Inhabitants of annexed territories were subject to Judea and were compelled to adopt Jewish practices, including circumcision. 

Until the arrival of Pompey in Jerusalem in 63 BCE, the kingdom of Judea was influential in the central and eastern Mediterranean regions. The Hasmoneans, once ardent defenders of Torah and tradition, had become international players with political power and began to engage in the process of Hellenization.

Queen Salome Alexandra 

When her husband Aristobulus I died, Queen Salome Alexandra—also known simply as just Alexandra or Salina, Shelamzion in Hebrew—married his brother Alexander Janneus (Yannai), whom she released from prison and elevated to be king. After his reign of twenty-seven years, Janneus died following a protracted illness and left the kingdom to her. She ruled from 76 to 67 BCE and thereby postponed until after her death a succession struggle between their sons, Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II. She established the older and less ambitious Hyrcanus II as high priest rather than the younger Aristobulus II, who was more ambitious and politically minded. The eventual succession crisis provided the entrée for direct Roman involvement in Judean affairs. 

According to Josephus, on his deathbed Janneus advised his wife to cede limited power to his adversaries the Pharisees, given their popularity, and thus win over the masses. In this way, she became queen but remained a pawn of the Pharisees. She was the last queen of Judea and the last ruler of ancient Judea to die as the ruler of an independent kingdom.

Most of what we know about Salome Alexandra is from the writings of Josephus, according to whom, she was wise and successful, and her reign was peaceful. She is also mentioned in rabbinic literature and is alluded to in the Dead Sea Scrolls. 

Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II 

Josephus tells us that after Alexandra’s death, Hyrcanus accepted Aristobulus’ victory and conceded the kingship to him in exchange for an honored position as the king’s brother. Despite this apparent truce, the conflict between the brothers would continue, due in part to the involvement of the Idumean leader Antipater I, father of Herod the Great, who was an enemy of Aristobulus and supporter of Hyrcanus. Both Hyrcanus and Aristobulus appealed to Pompey, then in the process of making Syria a province of the Roman Empire. 

Josephus recounts that when Pompey intervened in Judean affairs and ultimately took control of Jerusalem in 63 BCE—rendering Judea a client state of the Roman Empire—he put to rest the civil war being fought over the Hasmonean throne by factions supporting one or the other of the Hasmonean brothers, Hyrcanus II or Aristobulus II. Pompey ultimately sided with Hyrcanus and, after besieging Jerusalem and defeating Aristobulus, installed Hyrcanus as high priest. This was the first direct Roman intervention in Judean affairs and ushered in the Roman period.

Read Next: The Roman Conquest of Judea