« السابقةمتابعة »
hostilities were actually beginning, sent embassies to Rome, each hoping to enlist the sympathies of the Senate, and each laying the blame of the war upon the other,-Antiochus declaring that he held the Syrian provinces by inheritance from his father Antiochus the Great, and that he was only defending rights which had been unjustly (аρà Távта тà díκαιa) attacked, while Ptolemy contended that Antiochus the Great had taken advantage of the youth of his father, Ptolemy Epiphanes, to wrest these provinces from him. Nothing, however, of importance resulted from these embassies, and hostilities continued. In 170 B.C. Antiochus marched into Egypt with a considerable force (1 Macc. i. 17), defeated Ptolemy's troops between Pelusium and Mons Casius, and -by some dishonourable means which Polybius censures (xxviii. 7. 16) -obtained possession of the important border-fortress-the claustra Aegypti, as Livy calls it (xlv. 11)-of Pelusium. It was the clemency shewn by Antiochus in the battle near Pelusium-he rode about among his troops, and would not permit them to massacre the defeated Egyptians that won for him the favour of the Egyptians, and facilitated considerably both his capture of Pelusium, and his subsequent conquest of Egypt (Diod. xxx. 14). After the fall of Pelusium, Eulaeus, it seems, persuaded Ptolemy to abandon his kingdom, and retire to Samothrace (Polyb. xxviii. 17a); but,-apparently on the way thither,— he was intercepted, and fell into his uncle's hands. According to Jerome, Antiochus now, simulating friendship with his nephew, proceeded to Memphis, where ex more Aegypti he was crowned1; and pretending to be acting in Philometor's interests (puerique rebus se providere dicens), succeeded in occupying the whole of Egypt (cf. 1 Macc. i. 18-20), an act in which, Jerome adds, tam callidus fuit, ut prudentes cogitationes eorum qui duces pueri erant, sua fraude subverteret 2. After this Antiochus prepared to return to Syria. Meanwhile, however, disturbances had arisen in Jerusalem. rumour having been current of the death of Antiochus, Jason, the deposed and exiled high-priest (above, on ix. 26), thought the opportunity a favourable one for recovering his former position; so he attacked Jerusalem with 1000 men, and compelled Menelaus to take refuge in the citadel, but misusing his success for the purpose of slaughtering his own countrymen, was obliged to retire again to the country of the Ammonites (2 Macc. v. 5-10). Antiochus, hearing of these proceedings, thought Jerusalem was in revolt: so on his return from Egypt, he made a détour through Judaea, and entering the city with his army, massacred many of the inhabitants, penetrated into the sanctuary, and carried away all the sacred vessels, as well as all the other gold and silver that he could find there (1 Macc. i. 20—24; also, probably with some exaggeration, 2 Macc. v. 11-17, 21: cf. Jos. B. J. I. i. 1)3. In all this Antiochus was supported by Menelaus and his other Hellenizing
1 Cf. the coin, No. 4, on the Plate, p. 192.
• Hoffmann thinks that the first campaign against Egypt ended at Pelusium, his occupation of Egypt, mentioned above, in Jerome's condensed account, belonging really to his second campaign.
8 The statement in 2 Macc. v. I that these events took place on Antiochus's return from his second expedition into Egypt, appears to be erroneous.
friends among the Jews; indeed, according to Josephus (Ant. XII. v. 3) they opened the gates of Jerusalem to admit him.
Antiochus second expedition into Egypt (B.C. 169). It was probably during Antiochus' absence from Egypt that Philometor's younger brother, Ptolemy Physcon (afterwards Euergetes II.), was proclaimed king in Alexandria. This led to Antiochus' second invasion of Egypt (B.C. 169), in which he gave out that he was acting from the honourable motive of restoring his nephew and ally, Philometor, to his lawful rights, while, of course, in reality he was simply playing off one brother against the other with the object of securing all for himself. Having defeated the Egyptian fleet in a naval battle near Pelusium, he marched to Memphis, and then sailed down the Nile towards Alexandria. A little S. of Naukratis he was met by an embassy of Achaeans and others, who came on behalf of Physcon to treat for peace. Antiochus received the envoys courteously, and listened to their arguments. They cast the whole blame for what had occurred upon Lenaeus; and referring to Ptolemy's youth, and his relationship to himself, entreated the king to lay aside his anger. Antiochus replied, stating at length the grounds on which he claimed Syria: it had been held by Antigonus, the founder of the Syrian empire, it had been afterwards ceded formally by the Macedonian kings to his son, Seleucus, and it had been conquered afresh by his own father, Antiochus the Great: the agreement, by which, as was alleged, it had been granted by Antiochus the Great to Cleopatra as a dowry (above, on v. 17) he entirely denied. Polybius adds that he convinced all who heard him of the justice of his contention (ws dikala Méye). After this, Antiochus sailed on to Naukratis, where he treated the inhabitants graciously, giving to every Greek resident a gold coin. He then proceeded to lay siege to Alexandria. During the siege an embassy of Rhodians approached Antiochus with proposals for peace; but these envoys he cut short in their arguments by remarking that "the kingdom belonged to Ptolemy Philometor, that with him he had long been at peace [viz. since he fell into his hands, after the battle of Pelusium], and they were both friends; if therefore the Alexandrians were prepared to call Philometor back, he would not stand in their way. We do not know how long the siege of Alexandria continued; but the city must have suffered in it severely; Livy (xliv. 19) narrates how an embassy sent on behalf of Physcon to Rome, made a piteous appeal to the Senate, declaring that unless help were speedily forthcoming, the whole of Egypt would fall into the hands of Antiochus. C. Popillius Laenas, and two other envoys, were accordingly deputed by the Senate to terminate the war between the two kings, and to inform both that, whichever persisted in hostilities would not be regarded by the Romans as their friend or ally. However, before these envoys could reach Egypt, Antiochus, finding himself unable to take Alexandria, withdrew to Syria, leaving Philometor, cui regnum quaeri suis viribus simulabat ut victorem mox aggrederetur
This was the speciosus titulus with the help of which, by means of letters and embassies, he sought to win the sympathy of all the cities of Asia and Greece (Liv. xlv. 11).
(Livy xlv. 11), as nominal king at Memphis, and stationing a strong garrison in Pelusium.
Antiochus' third expedition into Egypt (B. C. 168). The garrison left in Pelusium, the 'key of Egypt,' opened Philometor's eyes: it was evident that Antiochus wished to be in a position to return to Egypt with his army when he pleased, and also that the end of the war between the two brothers would be that the victor, whichever he was, would fall afterwards an easy prey to Antiochus. Accordingly Philometor made overtures of peace to Physcon, which, being seconded by Physcon's friends, and warmly supported by his sister, Cleopatra, were listened to favourably: before long a reconciliation was effected and Philometor was received into Alexandria (Livy xlv. 11). As Livy drily remarks, if Antiochus' real object had been to restore Philometor to his throne, he ought to have rejoiced at this reconciliation: in point of fact, however, he was so incensed at it, that he proceeded (B.C. 168) to attack the two brothers with far greater animosity (multo acrius infestiusque) than he had ever displayed towards the one. His fleet he sent on at once to Cyprus; he himself, at the beginning of spring, marched by land through ColeSyria towards Egypt. At Rhinocolura, the border-stream of Egypt, he was met by the envoys of Philometor, who endeavoured to appease him by assuring him that their master gratefully recognized that it was by Antiochus' help that he had regained his kingdom, and that he hoped the king would still continue to be his friend. Antiochus replied that he would recall neither his army nor his fleet unless the whole of Cyprus were ceded to him, as well as Pelusium, and the country about the Pelusiac arm of the Nile; and appointed a day before which Philometor should declare whether he accepted these terms or not. As no answer came within the stipulated time, Antiochus advanced to Memphis, was well received by the people, 'partly from good-will, partly from fear,' and then proceeded by leisurely stages to Alexandria. At Eleusis, four miles from Alexandria, he was met by Popillius Laenas and the other Koman legates. He offered Popillius his hand. The Roman held out to him the ultimatum of the Senate, and bade him first read that. Antiochus, having read it, replied that he would consider with his friends what he would do. Popillius, pro cetera asperitate animi (cf. xlv. 10), drew with his staff a circle round the king; and bade him give his answer to the Senate before leaving that circle. Antiochus was taken aback at this unexpected demand; but, after a moment's hesitation, he replied, 'I will do what the Senate desires.' Then Popillius took his proffered hand. Antiochus was obliged to evacuate Egypt by a specified day; the Roman legates then took measures to consolidate the peace between the two brothers, and sailing to Cyprus, obliged the forces of Antiochus (which had already obtained a victory over the Egyptian generals) to retire from the island. Both Philometor and Antiochus afterwards sent flattering and complimentary messages to the Senate (Livy xlv. 13). Thus ended Antiochus' third expedition into Egypt.
For the subsequent years of Antiochus' reign, see on xi. 40.
22 And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea also, the 23 prince of the covenant. And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, 24 and shall become strong with a small people. He shall
22-24. General description of Antiochus' character and dealings. The verses have often (from Jerome onwards) been referred to Antiochus' first Egyptian campaign; but though occurrences in that campaign may be alluded to in them, they cannot, as a whole, be understood naturally as a description of it1. Observe also that the 'king of the south' is for the first time mentioned explicitly in v. 25. 22. And the arms of the flood] fig. for opposing forces. The metaphor is a mixed one for arms,' cf. v. 15; for the fig. of the flood, vv. 10, 26, 40; Is. viii. 8, xxviii. 2, 15; Jer. xlvii. 2. reference is ambiguous: it might of course be to the forces of Ptolemy Philometor; but more probably the domestic or other enemies who opposed Antiochus' rise to power are meant. According to Jerome there was a party in Syria which favoured the claims of Philometor.
shall be flooded (or swept) away from before him] he will prevail against them.
be broken] cf., of an army, 2 Ch. xiv. 12.
and also the prince of the covenant] most probably the high-priest, Onias III., who was deposed from his office by Antiochus in 175, and whose death was at least an indirect consequence of action taken by Antiochus (see above, on ix. 26). The words might, however, be also rendered a confederate prince (cf. Gen. xiv. 13; Ob. 7; Heb.): the reference would then be to Ptolemy Philometor; but it is an objection to this view that the king of Egypt is regularly throughout the chapter called the king of the south'; nor are the relations which (so far as we know) subsisted between Antiochus and Philometor such as would be described naturally as a 'covenant' or 'league.'
23. And from the time when he (or any) joins himself unto him-viz. in a league (2 Ch. xxx. 35, 37; cf. above, v. 6)—he shall work deceit] he will immediately scheme to overreach his ally. The reference is again ambiguous. The allusion might be specially to Antiochus' insincere friendship with Philometor, or to the manner in which he treated his allies in general.
and he shall come up] i.e., probably, rise to power (cf. Deut. xxviii. 43). The explanation 'go up (the Nile to Memphis)' (Jer. ascendit Memphim) is not natural. (The comma after up in A.V. should be transferred to follow strong.)
with a little (v. 34) nation] alluding apparently (Bevan) to the partisans of Antiochus, by whose help he was able to rise to power and overcome his rivals.'
1 The terms in which Jerome (p. 713) describes the campaign (though the facts, he says, are derived from Porphyry) are manifestly coloured by the phraseology of these verses of Daniel.
enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time.
24. In (time of) security (v. 21) and upon the fattest places (cf. Gen. xxvii. 28, Heb.) of the province shall he come] The Heb. is unusually harsh; though the fact in both A.V. and R.V. is most successfully concealed. In security' is probably accidentally out of place, and
for ובמשמני מדינה בשלוה יבוא .should follow * come (in the Heb
NI' ' 'DWDar nibwa). Cf. viii. 25 (also of Antiochus) ‘and in (time of) security he shall destroy many.' Again, the allusion is uncertain: it may be to Antiochus' acquisition of power over Syria; it may be to his attacks upon Judah, or to his invasions of Egypt.
prey and spoil and substance he shall scatter unto them] to his followers, or it may be to his people generally (for the vague use of the pron., cf. vv. 7, 25). The allusion is, no doubt, to Antiochus' lavish prodigality, in which he differed from most of the previous Syrian kings ('his fathers,' and 'his fathers' fathers'), who were usually in lack of surplus money. Cf. 1 Macc. iii. 30, and he feared that he should not have enough as at other times for the charges and the gifts which he used to give aforetime with a liberal hand, and he abounded above the kings which were before him'; also his liberality at Naukratis (above, p. 180), and the anecdotes of his lavish gifts to boon-companions, and even to strangers, in Polyb. xxvi. 10. 9-10, and Athen. x. 52 (p. 438). He was also very munificent in gifts to cities and temples, and in public shows (Liv. xli. 20, who cites examples1). Naturally, the funds for such purposes were obtained largely from the 'prey' and 'spoil' of plundered provinces: cf. 1 Macc. i. 19, and he took the spoils of Egypt,' iii. 31; Polyb. xxxi. 4. 9 (the cost of the games given by him in rivalry with those of Aem. Paullus in 167, defrayed in part out of the plunder of Egypt).
against fortresses, also, he shall devise his devices] frame warlike plans,-whether successfully, as against Pelusium and the other places in Egypt which he secured (cf. 1 Macc. i. 19, of his first campaign in Egypt, and they took the strong cities in the land of Egypt '), or unsuccessfully, as against Alexandria (see p. 180): perhaps, more particularly, the latter ('devise,'-as though ineffectually).
and that, until a time] until the time fixed, in the counsels of God, as the limit of such enterprises: cf. vv. 27, 35.
1 For instance, he promised and partly bore the cost of, a city-wall at Megalopolis in Arcadia: he contributed largely to the restoration of the temple of Zeus Olympios at Athens; he presented gold vessels to the Prytaneum at Cyzicus, and beautified Delos with altars and statues; and at home he not only made many improvements in his capital, but also, what in Syria was an innovation, gave frequent gladiatorial shows. The words 'spectaculorum quoque omnis generis magnificentia superiores reges vicit' (cf. Polyb. xxvi. 10. 11) illustrate especially 1 Macc. iii. 30, cited above.