Roman control of Judaea was first established by Gnaeus Pompeius. As victor he claimed the right to enter the Temple, and this incident gave rise to the common impression that it contained no representation of the deity – the sanctuary was empty and the Holy of Holies untenanted.
He came out saying that he could not understand what all the interest was about the sanctuary, when it was only an empty room.
8:
However, Pompey considered direct rule of Judah from Rome to be impractical, so he appointed Yoĥanan Hyrkanos to be 'Ethnarch' as well as High Priest. This title can perhaps best be rendered as 'national leader'. Whichever way one looks at it Yoĥanan Hyrkanos was now a Roman puppet and Judah was a client state subject to Rome. But it was to take two hundred years of continuous an unrelenting tension, violence, bloodshed, revolt and war before Rome could claim that Judah had been completely 'pacified'.
9:
It was now, even more than before, that all the political ineptitude that his parents had foreseen – and tried to forestall – came to the fore in the manner in which Yoĥanan Hyrkanos managed the affairs of state. Perhaps the error that Yoĥanan Hyrkanos made that is most significant for Jewish history is his choice of chief advisor.
10:
When he conquered Edom (Idumea) Pompey installed there an 'ethnarch' (puppet ruler) just as he had done in Judah. The person Rome appointed as the governor of Edom was a man named Antipas. Antipas had a son named Antipater. Antipater had great influence in Judah during the period of Yehudah Aristobulos, Yoĥanan Hyrkanos and Pompey the Great. This influence he had acquired because of his father's position. During the civil war between the two brothers Antipater saw his great opportunity and decided to become the primary influence on the life of Yoĥanan Hyrkanos. When the tension between the two brothers had reached its climax Antipater had sided with Yoĥanan Hyrkanos. Thus it was that when Yoĥanan Hyrkanos became 'ethnarch' of Judah he retained Antipater in his position of influence and power as the chief minister of state. Meanwhile, Antipater married a woman named Cypros, daughter of an illustrious Arab, by whom he had four sons: Phasael, Herod, Joseph, Pheroras, and a daughter, Salomé.
11:
It was not long before the Roman civil wars erupted and Yoĥanan Hyrkanos, because of Antipater, supported Pompey. (Julius Caesar had released Yehudah Aristobulos from his prison in Rome and sent him with two Roman legions to begin a revolt in Judah, but not long afterwards he was poisoned and could not carry out the plan.) After Pompey was defeated by Julius Caesar in 48 BCE Antipater acted shrewdly: he came to Caesar to aid him when the Roman commander was having serious trouble in Alexandria, and Caesar was so thankful that he rewarded Antipater with the title of chief minister of Judah once again. Caesar also granted him Roman citizenship, and the right to collect taxes for Rome. Antipater himself was also made exempt for any personal taxes.
12:
Antipater now toured Judah to put an end to the problems and convince the population to be loyal to Yoĥanan Hyrkanos. Deep inside though, he felt that Yoĥanan Hyrkanos was an unsuitable leader of Judah so he gradually took power into his own hands and appointed his son Phasael as governor of Jerusalem and his second son Herod as governor of Galilee. Meanwhile, in 44 BCE Julius Caesar was assassinated, and Cassius, one of the murderers, came to Syria demanding support. Antipater and Yoĥanan Hyrkanos had no choice but to assist him, and young Herod collected many taxes to help Cassius in his war against Marc Antony. The Jews, however, were extremely angry and bitter of Antipater's pro-Roman policies. Antipater was poisoned in 43 BCE.
To be continued.
In Avot 041 I wrote:
the husband would know that everything he possessed was mortgaged for the amount of the marriage deed. Thus he would think twice and three times before divorcing his wife.
Yehuda Wiesen writes:
But the ketuba amount due, usually 200 zuz, was not all that much money. So it would be a barrier to divorce only for the poor.
I respond:
This is not entirely accurate. The amount of 200 zuz (dinars) was the minimal amount that the law permits to be written in a ketubbah. Since, as we learned in Tractate Pe'ah, this was also the amount which we could define as 'the poverty line', we may assume that it was an amount sufficient to keep a woman with 'no visible means of support' above the poverty line for one year. The amount of 200 zuz it was customary to augment from two other sources: the husband was expected to provide an additional sum (tosefet) and the bride's father was also expected to provide a good dowry (nedunyah). Both the latter sums were subject to negotiation before the marriage. As long as the marriage lasted the husband was entitled to look upon the total amount of the ketubbah as 'money in the bank'; if he chose to divorce his wife he would have to remember that it was, in fact, a loan which would inevitably be called in.
