Herod
(hero-like). This family though of Idumean origin and thus alien by race, was Jewish in faith. I. HEROD THE GREAT was the second son of Antipater, an Idumean, who was appointed procurator of Judea by Julius Caesar, B.C. 47. Immediately after his father’s elevation when only fifteen years old, he received the government of Galilee and shortly afterward that of Coele-Syria. Though Josephus says he was 15 years old at this time, it is generally conceded that there must be some mistake, as he lived to be 69 or 70 years old, and died B.C. 4; hence he must have been 25 years old at this time.—ED.) In B.C. 41 he was appointed by Antony tetrarch of Judea. Forced to abandon Judea the following year, he fled to Rome, and received the appointment of king of Judea. In the course of a few years, by the help of the Romans he took Jerusalem (B.C. 37), and completely established his authority throughout his dominions. The terrible acts of bloodshed which Herod perpetrated in his own family were accompanied by others among his subjects equally terrible, from the number who fell victims to them. According to the well-known story) he ordered the nobles whom he had called to him in his last moment to be executed immediately after his decease, that so at least his death might be attended by universal mourning. It was at the time of his fatal illness that he must have caused the slaughter of the infants at Bethlehem. ( Matthew 2:16-18 ) He adorned Jerusalem with many splendid monuments of his taste and magnificence. The temple, which he built with scrupulous care, was the greatest of these works. The restoration was begun B.C. 20, and the temple itself was completed in a year and a half. But fresh additions were constantly made in succeeding years, so that it was said that the temple was “built in forty and six years,” ( John 2:20 ) the work continued long after Herod’s death. (Herod died of a terrible disease at Jericho, in April, B.C. 4, at the age of 69, after a long reign of 37 years.—ED.) II. HEROD Antipas , Antipas was the son of Herod the Great by Malthake, a Samaritan. He first married a daughter of Aretas, “king of Arabia Petraea,” but afterward Herodias, the wife of his half-brother, Herod Philip. Aretas, indignant at the insult offered to his daughter, found a pretext for invading the territory of Herod, and defeated him with great loss. This defeat, according to the famous passage in Josephus, was attributed by many to the murder of John the Baptist, which had been committed by Antipas shortly before, under the influence of Herodias. ( Matthew 14:4 ) ff.; Mark 6:17 ff.; Luke 3:19 At a later time the ambition of Herodias proved the cause of her husband’s ruin. She urged him to go to Rome to gain the title of king, cf. ( Mark 6:14 ) but he was opposed at the court of Caligula by the emissaries of Agrippa, and condemned to perpetual banishment at Lugdunum, A.D. 39. Herodias voluntarily shared his punishment, and he died in exile. Pilate took occasion from our Lord’s residence in Galilee to bend him for examination, ( Luke 23:6 ) ff., to Herod Antipas, who came up to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover. The city of Tiberias, which Antipas founded and named in honor of the emperor, was the most conspicuous monument of his long reign. III. HEROD PHILIP I. (Philip,) ( Mark 6:17 ) was the son of Herod the Great and Mariamne. He married Herodias the sister of Agrippa I by whom he had a daughter, Salome. He was excluded from all share in his father’s possessions in consequence of his mother’s treachery, and lived afterward in a private station. IV. HEROD PHILIP II. was the son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra. He received as his own government Batanea Trachonitis, Auramtis (Gaulanitis), and some parts about Jamnia, with the title of tetrarch. Luke 3:1 . He built a new city on the site of Paneas, near the sources of the Jordan, which be called Caesarea Philippi, ( Matthew 16:13 ; Mark 8:27 ) and raised Bethsaida to the rank of a city under the title of Julias and died there A.D. 34. He married Salome, the daughter of Herod Philip I. and Herodias. V. HEROD AGRIPPA I. was the son of Aristobulus and Berenice, and grandson of Herod the Great. He was brought up at Rome, and was thrown into prison by Tiberius, where he remained till the accession of Caligula, who made him king, first of the tetrarchy of Philip and Lysanias; afterward the dominions of Antipas were added, and finally Judea and Samaria. Unlike his predessors, Agrippa was a strict observer of the law, and he sought with success the favor of the Jews. It is probable that it was with this view he put to death James the son of Zebedee, and further imprisoned Peter. ( Acts 12:1 ) ff. But his sudden death interrupted his ambitious projects. ( Acts 12:21 , 23 ) VI. HEROD AGRIPPA II—was the son of Herod Agrippa I. In A.D. 62 the emperor gave him the tetrarches formerly held by Philip and Lysanias, with the title of king. ( Acts 25:13 ) The relation in which he stood to his sister Berenice, ( Acts 25:13 ) was the cause of grave suspicion. It was before him that Paul was tried. ( Acts 26:28 )
Herodians
(from Herod). ( Matthew 22:15 ) ff.; Mark 12:13 ff. Canon Cook describes these persons as “that party among the Jews who were supporters of the Herodian family as the last hope of retaining for the Jews a fragment of national government, as distinguished from absolute dependence upon Rome as a province of the empire. Supporters of the family of Herod, who held their dominions by the grant of the Roman emperor, would be in favor of paying tribute to the supreme power. ( Matthew 22:16 )
Herodias
daughter of Aristobulus, one of the sons of Mariamne and Herod the Great, and consequently sister of Agrippa I. She first married Herod Philip I.; then she eloped from him to marry Herod Antipas her step-uncle. The head of John the Baptist was granted at the request of Herodias. ( Matthew 14:8-11 ; Mark 6:24-28 ) (A.D. 29.) She accompanied Antipas into exile to Lugdunum
Herodion
a relative of St. Paul, to whom he sends his salutation amongst the Christians of the Roman church. ( Romans 16:11 ) (A.D. 55.)
High Places6813 Priest
The first distinct separation of Aaron to the office of the priesthood, which previously belonged to the first-born was that recorded ( Exodus 28:1 ) ... We find from the very first the following characteristic attributes of Aaron and the high priests his successors, as distinguished from the other priests: Aaron alone was anointed, ( Leviticus 8:12 ) whence one of the distinctive epithets of the high priest was “the anointed priest.” ( Leviticus 4:3 , 5 , 16 ; 21:10 ) see ( Numbers 35:25 ) The anointing of the sons of Aaron, i.e. the common priests seems to have been confined to sprinkling their garments with the anointing oil. ( Exodus 29:21 ; 28:41 ) etc. The high priest had a peculiar dress, which passed to his successor at his death. This dress consisted of eight parts: (a) The breastplate, or, as it is further named, vs. ( Exodus 28:15 , 29 , 30 ) the breastplate of judgment. The breastplate was originally two spans long and one span broad, but when doubled it was square, the shape in which it was worn. On it were the twelve precious stones, set in four rows, three in a row, thus corresponding to the twelve tribes—each stone having the name of one of the children of Israel engraved upon it. (b) The ephod . This consisted of two parts, of which one covered the back and the other the front, i.e. the breast and upper part of the body. These parts were clasped together on the shoulder with two large onyx stones, each having engraved on it six of the names of the tribes of Israel. They were further united by a “curious girdle” of gold blue purple, scarlet and fine twined linen round the waist. [ Ephod ; Girdle ] (C) The robe of the ephod. This was of inferior material to the ephod itself being all of blue, ver. 31, which implied its being only of “woven work.” ch. ( Exodus 39:22 ) It was worn immediately under the ephod, and was longer than it. The skirt of this robe had a remarkable trimming of pomegranates in blue, red and crimson, with a bell of gold between each pomegranate alternately. The bells were to give a sound when the high priest went in and came out of the holy place. (d) The mitre or upper turbin, with its gold plate, engraved with “Holiness to the Lord,” fastened to it by a ribbon of blue. (e) The broidered coat was a tunic or long skirt of linen with a tessellated or diaper pattern, like the setting of stone. (f) The girdle, also of linen, was wound round the body several times from the breast downward, and the ends hung down to the ankles. (g) The breeches or drawers, of linen, covered the loins and thighs; and (h) The bonnet was a turban of linen, partially covering the head, but not in the form of a cone like that of the high priest when the mitre was added to it. These last four were common to all priests. The high priest alone was permitted to enter the holy of holies, which he did once a year, on the great day of atonement, when he sprinkled the blood of the sin offering on the mercy seat, and burnt incense within the veil ( Leviticus 16:1 ) ... The manslayer might not leave the city of refuge during the lifetime of the existing high priest. It was also forbidden to the high priest to follow a funeral, or rend his clothes for the dead. It does not appear by whose authority the high priests were appointed to their office before there were kings of Israel. After this the office seems to have been used for political rather than religious purposes. Though at first chosen for life, we find that Solomon deposed Abiathar, ( 1 Kings 2:35 ) and that Herod appointed a number of high priests, which may account for there being at least two living in Christ’s time, Annas and Caiaphas. ( Luke 3:2 ) The usual are for entering upon the functions of the priesthood, according to ( 2 Chronicles 31:17 ) is considered to have been 20 years, though a priest or high priest was not actually incapacitated if he had attained to puberty. Again, according to ( Leviticus 21:17-21 ) no one that had a blemish could officiate at the altar. The theological view of the high priesthood does not fall within the scope of this work. It must suffice therefore to indicate that such a view would embrace the consideration of the office, dress, functions and ministrations of the high priest considered as typical of the priesthood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and as setting forth under shadows the truths which are openly taught under the gospel. This had been done to a great extent in the Epistle to the Hebrews. It would also embrace all the moral and spiritual teaching supposed to be intended by such symbols.