37. According to some (Ant. xiv. 1. 3), he was of noble Jewish, according to others, or
heathen and slave descent. The truth lies probably between these extremes.
38. It almost seems as if this repugnant story were a sort of Jewish Imitation of the circle
which Popilius Lænas drew around Antiochus Epiphanes, bidding him decide, ere he left
it, whether or not he would comply with the demand of the Romans.
39. Both Josephus and the Talmud (Sotah 49 b ) give an account, though in different
version, of the manner in which the besieged sought a supply of sacrifices from the
besiegers.
But already another power had appeared on the scene. Pompey was on his victorious
march through Asia when both parties appeal to him for help. Scaurus, whom Pomp ey
detached to Syria, was, indeed, bought by Aristobulus, and Aretas was ordered to raise
the siege of Jerusalem. But Pompey quickly discovered that Hycranus might, under the
tutelage of the cunning Idumæan, Antipater, prove an instrument more likely to se rve his
ulterior purposes than Aristobulus. Three deputations appeared before Pompey at
Damascus - those of the two brothers, and one independent of both, which craved the
abolition of the Asmonæan rule and the restoration of the former mode of government, as
we understand it, by the 'Chebher' or Eldership under the presidency of the High-Priest. It
need scarcely be said that such a demand would find no response. The consideration of
the rival claims of the Asmonæans Pompey postponed. The conduct of Aristob ulus not
only confirmed the unfavourable impression which the insolent bearing of his deputies
had made on Pompey, but sealed his own fate and that of the Jewish people. Pompey laid
siege to Jerusalem. The adherents of Hyrcanus surrendered the City, but those of
Aristobulus retired into the Temple. At last the sacred precincts were taken by storm
amidst fearful carnage. The priests, who were engaged in their sacred functions,40 and
who continued them during this terrible scene, were cut down at the altar. No fewer than
12,000 Jews are said to have perished.
40. According to Josephus, it was on the Day of Atonement; according to Dio Cassius,
apparently on a Sabbath. Comp. the remarks of Derenbourg on these conflicting
statements (u. s. p. 117, note).
With the taking of Jerusalem by Pompey (63 b.c.) the history of the Maccabees as a
reigning family, and, indeed, that of the real independence of Palestine, came to an end.
So truly did Jewish tradition realise this, that it has left us not a single notice either of this
capture of Jerusalem or of all the subsequent sad events to the time of Herod. It is as if
their silence meant that for them Judæa, in its then state, had no further history. Still, the
Roman conquerer had as yet dealt gently with his prostrate victim. Pompey had, indeed,
penetrated into the most Holy Place in contemptuous outrage of the most sacred feelings
of Israel; but he left the treasure of the Temple untouched, and even made provision for
the continuance of its services. Those who had caused the resistance of Jerusalem were
executed, and the country made tributary to Rome. But Judæa not only became subject to
the Roman Governor of Syria, its boundaries were also narrowed. All the Grecian cities
had their independence restored; Samaria was freed from Jewish supremacy; and the
districts comprised within the so-called Decapolis (or 'ten cities') again obtained self-
government. It was a sadly curtailed land over which Hyrcanus II., as High-Priest, was