him to espouse the claims of Antipas, who likewise appeared before Augustus to plead
for the royal succession, assigned to him in a former testament. The Herodian family,
while intriguing and clamouring each on his own account, were, for reasons easily
understood, agreed that they would rather not have a king at all, but be under the
suzerainty of Rome; though, if king there mus t be, they preferred Antipas to Archelaus.
Meanwhile, fresh troubles broke out in Palestine, which were suppressed by fire, sword,
and crucifixions. And now two other deputations arrived in the Imperial City. Philip, the
step-brother of Archelaus, to whom the latter had left the administration of his kingdom,
came to look after his own interests, as well as to support Archelaus.15 16 At the same
time, a Jewish deputation of fifty, from Palestine, accompanied by eight thousand Roman
Jews, clamoured for the deposition of the entire Herodian race, on account of their
crimes,17 and the incorporation of Palestine with Syria - no doubt in hope of the same
semi- independence under their own authorities, enjoyed by their fellow-religionists in the
Grecian cities. Augustus decided to confirm the last testament of Herod, with certain
slight modifications, of which the most important was that Archelaus should bear the title
of Ethnarch, which, if he deserved it, would by-and-by be exchanged for that of King.
His dominions were to be Judæa, Idumæa, and Samaria, with a revenue of 600 talents 18
(about 230,000l. to 240,000l). It is needless to follow the fortunes of the new Ethnarch.
He began his rule by crushing all resistance by the wholesale slaughter of his opponents.
Of the High-Priestly office he disposed after the manner of his father. But he far
surpassed him in cruelty, oppression, luxury, the grossest egotism, and the lowest
sensuality, and that, without possessing the talent or the energy of Herod.19 His brief
reign ceased in the year 6 of our era, when the Emperor banished him, on account of his
crimes to Gaul.
15. Ant. xvii. 11. 1; War ii. 6. 1.
16. I cannot conceive on what ground Keim (both in Schenkel's Bible Lex, and in his 'Jesu
von Nazara') speaks of him as a pretender to the throne.
17. This may have been the historical basis of the parable of our Lord in St. Luke xix. 12-
27.
18. The revenues of Antipas were 200 talents, and those of Philip 100 talents.
19. This is admitted even by Braun (Söhne d. Herodes, p. 8). Despite its pretentiousness
this tractate is untrustworthy, being written in a party spirit (Jewish).
It must have been soon after the accession of Archelaus,20 but before tidings of it had
actually reached Joseph in Egypt, that the Holy Family returned to Palestine. The first
intention of Joseph seems to have been to settle in Bethlehem, where he had lived since
the birth of Jesus. Obvious reasons would incline him to choose this, and, if possible, to
avoid Nazareth as the place of his residence. His trade, even had he been unknown in
Bethlehem, would have easily supplied the modest wants of his household. But when, on
reaching Palestine, he learned who the successor of Herod was, and also, no doubt, in
what manner he had inaugurated his reign, common prudence would have dictated the
withdrawal of the Infant -Saviour from the dominions of Archelaus. But it needed Divine
direction to determine his return to Nazareth. 21