Actually Hellenistic rule was quite forgiving and open to other ethnicities. Except for various taxes, direct and indirect, the primary thing they asked however was merely loyalty and thus support in cases of warfare or similar troubles. For some reason people have rather negative view on how the Hellenistic kings ruled.
Probably that whole 'Zeus in the temple of Jerusalem' episode.
Isolated perhaps, but later history has magnified it.
it's what happens when an autocratic ruler gets the idea that he's a god, or inspired directly by him. (hence Antiochos IV "Epiphanes", which means "God manifest", and his less flattering nickname, "Epimanes" (the mad)).
let's face it, Antiochos IV just played right into Hasmonean and Idumean hands there.
Last edited by Ibrahim; 05-20-2013 at 07:30.
I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.
my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).
tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!
"We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode" -alBernameg
Please, please, please...EB is dedicated to factual research, leave religious/political rhetoric out of this place.
Antiochos didn't do anything out of the ordinary. It wasn't an uncommon request to honour some Greek gods and basileus after behaving in a disloyal fashion. From turmoil to revolts and uprisings or supporting an enemy,... it was rather common for them to be punished by limiting freedoms, having garrisons, asking more/new taxes (all for a limited time) and giving such a festival in honour of a God and the king. It's just part of what is called the give and grant model, which promoted loyalty to a polis(,...) by rewarding them with certain rights (having no garrison, removal of a certain tax,...) or gifts (often large quantities of olive oil needed for the Gymnasion). Antiochos IV did nothing out of the ordinary, also remember that it was a request of the (more Hellenized) elite of Jerusalem themselves that started all of the problems. Antiochus IV merely wanted to grant the citizens of Jerusalem favours. He didn't know how divided they were, nor what the impact of his standard actions would have on a people most didn't quite understand. And of course the whole story was blown up in proportion for political gain (legitimation for the Hasmonean dynasty and the way they ruled) and later for religious reasons as well.
Also the Idumeans are from the time of john Hyrcanus. They were not connected with the "jews" at that time (original "revolt" of the Hasmoneans) in history. Until they were forced to be circumcised and adopt jewish culture and religion (if you can even separate these two at the time). If anything the Hasmoneans were more guilty of the deeds they blamed Antiochos IV themselves.
Last edited by Moros; 05-20-2013 at 16:01.
well, yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that he played into the hands of the two people (granted, the Idumeans are later). And I was more thinking along propaganda lines--what was written--rather than the actual rebellion.
And even then, I'm sure his eccentricities didn't help matters--though how much of that is propaganda too is not certain.
I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.
my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).
tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!
"We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode" -alBernameg
Well the main sources on Antiochus IV are the Maccebees and Josephos. Except for that we have a little titbit of information from Appian and Livius. The latter says some said the man was insane, though Livius himself says that he just didn't know what he wanted. But he was generous in his donations to cities and in cultivating the gods. So he was rather a prime example of the give and grant model, and did only what he thought was good and what was customary.
ah !! Sorry !! i dont know why for gods sake i wrote HELLENICS !! i wanted to Write IONIANs !!!!
hellenics were the same slaver & Wild & intolerant, when they invaded anywhere like Makedonians !!
i meant IONIANS the tolerant and civilized Greeks!! while the fact is they were ARYAN GREEKS not Original greeks !!
I have no idea what you are trying to say, but it looks like flamebait.
As the original question has been answered, I am going to go ahead and close this thread.
Thread closed.
Looking for a good read? Visit the Library!
Bookmarks