The place in which the sessions of the Sanhedrim were ordinarily held was, according to the Talmud, a hall called Gazzith, supposed to have been situated in the south-east corner of one of the courts near the Temple building. In special exigencies, however, it seems to have met in the residence of the high-priest (Matt. xxvi. 3). Forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem, and consequently while the Saviour was teaching in Palestine, the sessions of the Sanhedrim were removed from the hall Gazzith to a somewhat greater distance from the temple building, although still on Mount Moriah. After several other changes, its seat was finally established at Tiberias. As a judicial body the Sanhedrim constituted a supreme court, to which belonged in the first instance the trial of a tribe fallen into idolatry, false prophets, and the high-priest, as well as the other priests. As an administrative council, it determined other important matters. Jesus was arraigned before this body as a false prophet (John xi. 47), and Peter, John, Stephen, and Paul as teachers of error and deceivers of the people. From Acts ix. 2, it appears that the Sanhedrim exercised a degree of authority beyond the limits of Palestine. According to the Jerusalem Gemara, the power of inflicting capital punishment was taken away from this tribunal forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem. With this agrees the answer of the Jews to Pilate (John xix. 31), “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." Beyond the arrest, trial, and condemnation of one convicted of violating the ecclesiastical law, the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrim at the time could not be extended; the confirmation and execution of the sentence in capital cases belonged to the Roman procurator. The stoning of Stephen (Acts vii. 56 sqq.) is only an apparent exception, for it was either a tumultuous procedure, or, if done by order of the Sanhedrim, was an illegal assumption of power, as Josephus (Ant. xx. 9, 1) expressly declares the execution of the Apostle James during the absence of the procurator to have been. Cf. Joseph. Ant. xviii. 6, 4. Ant. xvii, 1, 3. (4) Herod the King, Matt. ii. 1 ff.; Luc. i. 5. (27) Herod the King, Acts xii. 1. B. J. i. 28, 4. (45) Agrippa (15) Herod the Tetrarch, Matt. xiv. 1; Luc. iii, 1, 19, ix. 7. King Herod, Mark vi. 14. (36) King Agrippa, Acts xxv. 13. detail. The members of the Herodian family who are mentioned in the N. T. are distinguished by capitals. The family relations of the Herods are singularly complicated from the frequent recurrence of the same names, and the several accounts of Josephus are not consistent in every (46) Alexander § 1. Government and policy of the Herodian family-HEROD THE GREAT -Massacre of the Sanhedrim--The high-priesthood-Aristobulus appointed and murdered-Herod and Cleopatra-The Battle of Actium -Herod and Octavian. § 2. Extent and divisions of Herod's kingdom. § 3. Domestic tragedies-Deaths of Mariamne and Alexandra. § 4. Government of Herod-His hellenizing practices-Building of the Antonia, of Sebaste, and of Cæsarea-Herod courts Augustus and Agrippa-His munificence. § 5. Rebuilding of the Temple. § 6. Family of Herod-Judicial murder of Aristobulus and AlexanderConspiracy and condemnation of Antipater. § 7. Herod's last illness -Alarm at the birth of Christ-The Massacre at Bethlehem-Execution of Antipater-Death of Herod. § 8. Character of Herod-His place in Sacred History-The subsequent history of the Jews in two streams. § 1. THE history of the Herodian family presents one side of the last development of the Jewish nation. The evils already seen in the hierarchy which grew up after the Return, found an unexpected embodiment in the tyranny of a foreign usurper. Religion was adopted as a policy; and the hellenizing designs of Antiochus Epiphanes were carried out, at least in their spirit, by men who professed to observe the Law. Side by side with the spiritual "kingdom of God," proclaimed by John the Baptist, and founded by the Lord, a kingdom of the world was established, which in its external splendor recalled the traditional magnificence of Solomon. The simultaneous realization of the two principles, national and spiritual, which had long variously influenced the Jews in the establishment of a dynasty and a church, is a fact pregnant with instruction. In the fullness of time a descendant of Esau established a false counterpart of the promised glories of Messiah. Various accounts are given of the ancestry of the Herods; but, neglecting the exaggerated statements of friends and enemies,' it seems certain that they were of Idumæan descent, a fact which is indicated by the forms of some of the names which were retained in the family. But though aliens by race, the Herods were Jews in faith. The Idumæans had been conquered and brought over to Judaism by John Hyrcanus (B.c. 130); and from the time of their conversion they remained constant to their new religion, looking upon Jerusalem as their mother city, and claiming for themselves the name of Jews." The general policy of the whole Herodian family, though modified by the personal characteristics of the successive rulers, was the same. It centred in the endeavor to found a great and independent kingdom, in which the power of Judaism should subserve the consolidation of a state. The protection of Rome was in the first instance a necessity; but the designs of Herod I. and Agrippa I. point to an independ The Jewish partisans of Herod (Nicolas Damascenus, ap. Joseph. Ant. xiv. 1, 3) sought to raise him to the dignity of a descent from one of the noble families which returned from Babylon; and, on the other hand, early Christian writers represented his origin as utterly mean and servile. Africanus has preserved a tradition (Routh, Rell. Sacr. ii. p. 235), on the authority of "the natural kinsmen of the Saviour," which makes Antipater the father of Herod, the son of one Herod, a slave attached to the service of a temple of Apollo at Ascalon, who was taken prisoner by Idumæan robbers, and kept by them, as his father could not pay his ransom. The locality (cf. Philo, Leg. ad Caium, §30) no less than the office was calculated to fix a heavy reproach upon the name (cf. Routh, ad loc.). This story is repeated with great inaccuracy by Epiphanius (Hær. xx.). Joseph. Ant. xx. 7, § 7; B. J. i. 10, § 4, iv. 4, § 4. 2 5 3 ent Eastern Empire as their end, and not to a mere subject monarchy. Such a consummation of the Jewish hopes seems to have found some measure of acceptance at first, and hence arose the party of the Herodians; and by a natural reaction the temporal dominion of the Herods opened the way to the destruction of the Jewish nationality. The religion which was degraded into the instrument of unscrupulous ambition lost its power to quicken a united people. The high-priests were appointed and deposed by Herod I. and his successors with such a reckless disregard for the character of their office, that the office itself was deprived of its sacred dignity. The nation was divided, and amid the conflicts of sects a universal faith arose, which more than fulfilled the nobler hopes that found no satisfaction in the treacherous grandeur of a court. HEROD THE GREAT (B.C. 37–4) was now established on the throne of Judæa, and founded a dynasty of princes who ruled in different parts of Palestine under various titles; but among whom he himself was the last, as he was the first, independent sovereign of the whole country. For he may be termed independent in reference to the exercise of his power, though its origin and tenure rested on the will of his Roman masters. By birth an Idumæan, by policy and predilection an adherent and imitator of Rome, he seemed to many of his subjects little better than a heathen conqueror; and his cruelties to the Asmonæan house, which was still held in reverence, roused a deep sense of indignation. He signalized his elevation to the throne by offerings to the Capitoline Jupiter, and surrounded his person with foreign mercenaries, some of whom had been formerly in the service of Cleopatra. His coins, and those of his successors, bore only Greek legends, and he introduced heathen games within the walls of Jerusalem. He resolved at once to show the malcontents that they had a master. Massacre and confiscation were dealt out to the Asmonæan party. Forty-five of the chief adherents of Antigonus were put to death, with the whole Sanhedrim, except the rabbis Sameas and Pollie," who had counseled the surrender of Jerusalem during the siege. Their spoils enabled Herod to satisfy the rapacity of his patron Antony. The whole period of Herod's reign was, in many respects, a 3 Notes and Illustrations (A). 4 See Acts xxiii. 2 fol. 5 Ewald observes that Herod is not but this is a title of royalty, not the appellation of the man. The Jewish names of these two called the Great in any contemporary great rabbis were Shemaiah and Abdocument. There are inscriptions taleon. They were the sons of proswhich style him "the Great King," elytes. |