Content area
Full Text
A series of important changes overtook the Jewish high priesthood in the early Seleucid period. Zadokites in the family line of Joshua the son of Jehozadak had passed the office along in hereditary fashion for about 350 years before Menelaus, a person with different family connections (2 Mace 3:4), usurped the office in 172 B.C.E. At Menelaus's death in 162 B.C.E., Alcimus, whose familial connections are unknown,1 succeeded him by royal appointment (162-159 B.C.E.). After Alcimus came that sacerdotal black hole from 159-152 B.C.E. Then in 152, Jonathan, a son of Mattathias, became the first Hasmonean high priest; members from his family retained the office until 37 (and briefly again in 35) B.C.E.
In the scholarly literature one often meets the claim that the Hasmoneans were not Zadokites;2 that is, they assumed an office not belonging to their family and thus occasioned charges against their legitimacy by groups such as the Essenes and Pharisees. What information do we have about this? Do we actually know that the Hasmoneans were not Zadokites? And do we know that Essenes and Pharisees questioned the genealogical right of the Hasmonean family to hold the high-priestly office? These questions are pursued in the sections below.
I. Were the Hasmoneans Zadokites?
Genealogy
We should first examine the genealogical data that have been transmitted. 1 Maccabees is our oldest direct source of information about the family history of the Hasmoneans. When he introduces Mattathias, the author tells the reader: "In those days Mattathias son of John son of Simeon, a priest of the family of Joarib, moved from Jerusalem and settled in Modein. He had five sons ..." (1 Mace 2:1-2 NRSV; cf. 14:29). Josephus, a priest who traced his own ancestry to the Hasmoneans (Life 1.1-6), wrote as he paraphrased 1 Mace 2:1-2: "At this time there was a man living in the village of Modai in Judaea, named Mattathias, the son of Joannes, the son of Symeon, the son of Asamonaeos [Aσαμωαιoυ], a priest of the course of Joarib and a native of Jerusalem. He had five sons . . ." (Ant. 12.265-66 [trans. Marcus, LCL]).3 So the historian appears to trace the line another generation and by doing so provides the origin of the name usually given to the...