Trypho sought now to get rid of the man whom he himself had made so powerful.  He treacherously seized and imprisoned Jonathan in Ptolemais, and meditated an attack upon the leaderless country.  But on the frontier Simon, the last remaining son of Mattathias, met him in force.  All Trypho’s efforts to break through proved futile; after skirting all Judaea from west to south, without being able to get clear of Simon, he at last withdrew to Peraea without having accomplished anything.  On the person of Jonathan, whom he caused to be executed, he vented the spleen he felt on the discovery that the cause for which that prince had fought was able to gain the victory even when deprived of his help.  Simon, in point of fact, was Jonathan’s equal as a soldier and his superior as a ruler.  He secured his frontier by means of fortresses, made himself master of Acra (141), and understood how to enable the people in time of peace to reap the advantages that result from successful war; agriculture, industry, and commerce (from the haven of Joppa) began to flourish vigorously.  In grateful recognition of his services the high-priesthood and the ethnarchy were bestowed upon him as hereditary possessions by a solemn assembly of the people, “until a trustworthy prophet should arise.”

Nominally the Seleucidae still continued to possess the suzerainty.  Simon naturally had detached himself from Trypho and turned to Demetrius II., who confirmed him in his position, remitted all arrears of tribute, and waived his rights for the future (142).  The friendship of Demetrius II. and of his successor Antiochus Sidetes with Simon, however, lasted only as long as Trypho still remained in the way.  But, he once removed, Sidetes altered his policy.  He demanded of Simon the surrender of Joppa, Gazara, and other towns, besides the citadel of Jerusalem, as well as payment of all tribute resting due.  The refusal of these demands led to war, which in its earlier stages was carried on with success, but the scales were turned after the murder of Simon, when Sidetes in person took the field against John Hyrcanus, Simon’s son and successor.  Jerusalem capitulated; in the negotiations for peace the surrender of all the external possessions of the Jews was insisted upon; the suzerainty of the Syrians became once more a reality (I35).  But in 130 the powerful Antiochus Sidetes fell in an expedition against the Parthians, and the complications anew arising in reference to the succession to the Syrian throne placed Hyrcanus in a position to recover what he had lost and to make new acquisitions.  He subjugated Samaria and Idumaea, compelling the inhabitants of the latter to accept circumcision.  Like his predecessors, he too sought to secure the favour of the Romans, but derived no greater benefit from the effort than they had done.  After a prosperous reign of thirty years he died in 105.  By Josephus he is represented as a pattern of all that a pious prince ought to be; by the rabbins as representing a splendid high-priesthood.  The darkness of the succeeding age lent a brighter colour to his image.