GIOVANNI IRCANO. – Son of Simone Maccabeo, initiator of the Hasmonean dynasty (v.), although the title of king was officially assumed only by his successors. In I Mach. (13, 54; 16, 1.
2. 21-23), his military skill and his prompt intervention against his father’s assassins are recalled, in addition to his victory over Cendebeo (ibid. 16, 9). In 135–34 B.C. he succeeded Simone, who had been killed together with his other two sons. From the outset G. was involved in military actions, first against Tolomeo, the murderer of his family, and then against the Seleucid king Antioco VII.
Both enterprises proved difficult. Nevertheless, by threatening Roman intervention on his behalf, as seems possible to deduce from uncertain information in Flavio Giuseppe (Antiq. Iud., XIII, 259-66; cf. XIV, 143 sgg., 247 sgg.), G. managed to obtain terms from Antioco VII that were not too harsh; the latter intended to secure his position in the south before moving against the Parthians in the north-east of his Kingdom. Recognition of Seleucid suzerainty lasted only a short time, because after the death of Antioco VII, during the decline of the Greek Kingdom, it was easy for G. I. to declare himself practically independent (op. cit., XIII, 273). Indeed, he was able to begin his campaigns of expansion against Idumea, Transjordan, and especially against the Samaritans, whose temple on Mount Garizim he destroyed. In addition to a nationalistic motive, G. I. also aimed at the spread of pure Yahwism, which he often sought to propagate by force, as when he compelled the Idumeans to undergo circumcision and adopt Jewish rites (loc. cit., 257-58).
Internally, the Kingdom of G. I. – which must have been very prosperous – was characterized by the sharpening of the differences between the two antagonistic ideological currents, the Pharisees and the Sadducees. According to Flavio Giuseppe (loc. cit., 288-98), G. I., who professed the ideas of the Pharisees, suddenly passed over to the opposing sect and persecuted his former friends. This change was probably due to a muted opposition from the Pharisees, who disapproved, in an impulsive and secular character such as G. I., both the union of the high priesthood with civil power and his policy toward foreigners, who were also admitted into the ranks of the Yahwistic army (loc. cit., 248-52).