en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great
3 corrections found
According to Josephus, Herod was a descendant of Eleazar Maccabeus (Auran) of the Hasmoneans, making him half-Jewish.
Josephus does not say Herod descended from Eleazar Maccabeus or the Hasmoneans. In Josephus, Herod’s paternal line is Idumaean, and the "half-Jew" remark refers to his Idumaean background, not Hasmonean ancestry.
Full reasoning
This sentence misattributes a genealogy to Josephus.
In Antiquities 14.9, Josephus says Nicolaus of Damascus claimed Antipater was descended from leading Jews who returned from Babylon, but Josephus immediately rejects that claim as flattering propaganda for Herod. In the same passage Josephus instead describes Antipater's line as Idumaean: Antipater/Antipas and his father were associated with Idumaea, not the Hasmonean family.
Separately, in Antiquities 14.403, Josephus reports Antigonus calling Herod "an Idumean, i.e. a half Jew." That is the Josephus passage behind the "half-Jew" idea. It does not say Herod was half-Jewish because he descended from Eleazar Maccabeus/Hasmoneans.
So the article's statement is wrong on two points:
- Josephus does not identify Herod as a descendant of Eleazar Maccabeus/Avaran.
- Josephus' "half-Jew" language is tied to Herod's Idumaean background, not to any Hasmonean descent.
Herod's well-known Hasmonean connection came through marriage to Mariamne, not through a Josephus-stated descent from Eleazar Maccabeus.
3 sources
- Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 14.9
'Nicolaus of Damascus says, that Antipater was of the stock of the principal Jews who came out of Babylon into Judea; but that assertion of his was to gratify Herod ...'
- Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 14.403
Antigonus said they should not give the kingdom to Herod, 'who was no more than a private man, and an Idumean, i.e. a half Jew'.
- Herod - Encyclopedia of The Bible - Bible Gateway
'The first of the Herodian dynasty was Antipater ... appointed governor of Idumea ... His son was also named Antipater and Josephus considered him an Idumean by race ... Antipater married ... Cypros, of an illustrious Arabian.'
Herod overthrew the Hasmonean Antigonus in a three-year-long war between 37 and 34 BCE
Those dates are wrong. Herod’s war against Antigonus began after Antigonus seized Jerusalem in 40 BCE and ended with Herod’s capture of Jerusalem in 37 BCE.
Full reasoning
The chronology here is internally inconsistent with the standard historical sequence.
Secondary reference works place Antigonus on the throne from 40 to 37 BCE, after the Parthian-backed seizure of Jerusalem in 40 BCE. Herod then returned with Roman support and captured Jerusalem in 37 BCE, ending Antigonus's rule. That means the conflict runs roughly 40/39 to 37 BCE, not "between 37 and 34 BCE."
The article's dating is wrong in two ways:
- It starts the war too late: by 37 BCE Herod was already at the point of taking Jerusalem.
- It extends the war too late: Antigonus was already defeated and executed in 37 BCE, so the war cannot have continued to 34 BCE.
A likely explanation is that the sentence accidentally shifted the dates of Herod's later reign onto the earlier civil war with Antigonus.
3 sources
- Herod - Encyclopedia of The Bible - Bible Gateway
Herod 'sailed back to Ptolemais in late 40 b.c. or early 39 b.c.... Next spring (37 b.c.), the third year since he had been proclaimed king when at Rome, Herod moved his troops to Jerusalem and prepared for the siege.'
- British Museum - Mattathias Antigonus
In an invasion supported by the Parthians, Antigonus seized Jerusalem in 40 BC... in 37 BC Herod the Great took back Judea and Antigonus was put to death by the Romans under Mark Antony.
- Center for Online Judaic Studies - Josephus, War I, 199-358
The page summarizes Josephus's narrative: two years after Antony appointed the brothers tetrarchs, the Parthians set up Antigonus; Herod then fled, went to Rome, and later returned with Roman backing to recover Judea.
Herod Archelaus, from the marriage with Malthace, would rule as ethnarch over the tetrachy of Judea
Archelaus did not receive a tetrarchy of Judea. He was made ethnarch over Judea, Samaria, and Idumea; the tetrarchies went to Antipas and Philip.
Full reasoning
This sentence mixes up two different successor titles.
After Herod's death, Archelaus was assigned the main southern portion of the kingdom and held the title ethnarch, not tetrarch. Standard reference works describe his territory as Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. The title tetrarch belonged to his brothers Herod Antipas and Philip, who ruled other portions of the kingdom.
So calling Archelaus "ethnarch over the tetrachy of Judea" is incorrect: Judea under Archelaus was an ethnarchy, not a tetrarchy.
3 sources
- Herod - Encyclopedia of The Bible - Bible Gateway
After considerable debate and delay Augustus decided on a compromise solution, viz., Archelaus was designated ethnarch ... and was to rule over Idumea, Judea, and Samaria.
- Archelaus - Jewish Encyclopedia
Archelaus was accordingly appointed ethnarch—not king—of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea ...
- British Museum - Herod the Great
Augustus ... named Archelaus 'Ethnarch' over Judaea, Samaria and Idumaea. Antipas was granted the tetrarchy of Galilee and Peraea, and Philip II was granted the tetrarchy of Trachonitis, Ituraea, Batanea, and Auranitis.