The Acra (also spelled Akra, from , Ḥaqra(h)), meaning "stronghold" (see under "Etymology"), was a location in Jerusalem thought to have contained a fortified compound built by Antiochus Epiphanes, ruler of the Seleucid Empire, following his sack of the city in 168 BCE. The name Acra was also used at a later time for a city quarter probably associated with the by-then destroyed fortress, known to Josephus (first century CE) as both Acra and "the lower city". The fortress played a significant role in the events surrounding the Maccabean Revolt, which resulted in the formation of the Hasmonean Kingdom. The "upper city" was captured by Judas Maccabeus, with the Seleucid garrison taking refuge in the "Acra" below.Josephus (1980), The Jewish War 1.1.4. (p. 430)Josephus (1980), p. 28. The task of destroying this last enemy stronghold inside Jerusalem fell to Simon Maccabeus surnamed Thassi.Josephus (1980), The Jewish War 1.2.2. (p. 430) Knowledge about the Acra is based almost exclusively on the writings of Josephus, which are of a later date, and on the First and Second Books of Maccabees, which were written not long after the described events.Rappaport, U., "47. 1 Maccabees" in Barton, J. and Muddiman, J. (2001), The Oxford Bible Commentary , p. 711.
The exact location of Acra within Jerusalem, and even the meaning of the term—fortress, fortified compound inside the city, or compound with an associated fortress—is critical to understanding Hellenistic Jerusalem, but it remains a matter of ongoing discussion. The fact that Josephus used the name interchangeably with 'the lower city'Decoster (1989), pp. 70–84. certainly does not help. Historians and archaeologists have proposed various sites around Jerusalem, relying initially mainly on conclusions drawn from literary evidence. This approach began to change in the light of excavations which commenced in the late 1960s. New discoveries have prompted reassessments of the ancient literary sources, Jerusalem's geography, and previously discovered artifacts. The more recent theories combine archaeological and textual evidence and favour locations near the Temple Mount and south of it,Decoster (1989). p. 71. but there are alternative theories as well (see "Location").
The ancient Greek term acra was used to describe other fortified structures during the Hellenistic period. The Acra is often called the Seleucid Acra to distinguish it from references to the Ptolemaic Baris as an acra and from the later city quarter of Jerusalem which inherited the name Acra.
Etymology Acra is a shortened form of the Greek akrópolis, adopted in Aramaic usage and connotating "citadel" or "stronghold".Cf. the Aramaic translation made by Yonathan ben Uziel in for the "stronghold of Zion", as well as in for the word "fort" (), and which was no more than the city of David. See also the Palestinian Aramaic translation of for "fortified cities", which is translated as .
History Background Below are the events leading up to the Maccabean Revolt in which the Acra played an important role, based again mainly on Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews and the First and Second Book of Maccabees.
Following Alexander the Great's death in 323 BCE, Coele-Syria was contested between the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt, and the Seleucid Empire based in Syria and Mesopotamia. Seleucid emperor Antiochus III's victory over Egypt in the Battle of Panium brought Coele-Syria under Seleucid control. The Jewish population of Jerusalem had aided Antiochus during his siege of the Baris, the fortified base of the Egyptian garrison in Jerusalem.Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 12:133–138 Their support was rewarded with a charter affirming Jewish religious autonomy, including barring foreigners and impure animals from the Temple precincts, and an allocation of official funds for the maintenance of certain religious rituals in the Temple.Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 12:138–146 Despite being allowed religious freedom, many Jews were enticed by and adopted elements of the prestigious and influential Greek lifestyle. The imperial culture offered a route to political and material advancement, and this led to the formation of Hellenistic elites among the Jewish population. Hellenization produced tensions between observant Jews and their brethren who had assimilated Greek culture.Goodman (2010), pp. 60–67.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 BCE. Shortly afterward, Epiphanes was petitioned by Jason for appointment to the position of High Priest of Israel—an office occupied by his brother Onias III. Jason, himself thoroughly Hellenized, furthermore promised to increase the tribute paid by the city and to establish within it the infrastructure of a Greek polis, including a gymnasium and an ephebion.2 Maccabees, 4:7–9 Jason's petition was granted, yet after a 42-month rule he was ousted by Antiochus and forced to flee to Ammon.2 Maccabees, 4:23,26Schiffman (1991), pp. 73–74. In the meantime, Antiochus IV had launched two invasions of Egypt, in 170 BCE and again in 169 BCE, and routed the Ptolemaic armies.2 Maccabees, 5:11 Maccabees, 1:16–19Schäfer (2003), pp. 36–40. Antiochus' victories were short-lived. His intent to unify the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms alarmed the rapidly expanding Roman state, which demanded that he withdraw his forces from Egypt. With Antiochus engaged in Egypt, a false rumor spread in Jerusalem that he had been killed. In the ensuing uncertainty, Jason gathered a force of 1,000 followers and attempted to take Jerusalem by storm. Although the attack was repulsed, when word of the fighting reached Antiochus in Egypt, he suspected his Judean subjects of exploiting his setback as an opportunity to revolt. In 168 BCE, Antiochus IV Epiphanes marched on and sacked Jerusalem, looting the temple treasury and killing thousands of its residents.Schwartz (2004), p. 144.1 Maccabees, 1:21–252 Maccabees, 5:11–14 Reversing his father's policy, Antiochus IV issued decrees outlawing traditional Jewish rites and persecuting observant Jews. Temple rituals were discontinued, Jewish observance of Sabbath prohibited, and circumcision outlawed.1 Maccabees, 1:45–47Schiffman (1991), pp. 76–77.
Construction To consolidate his hold on the city, monitor events on the Temple Mount and safeguard the Hellenized faction in Jerusalem, Antiochus stationed a Seleucid garrison in the city:Wightman (1990), pp. 29–40.
The name Acra derived from the Greek acropolis signifies a lofty fortified place overlooking a town. In Jerusalem, the word came to symbolize anti-Jewish paganism: a fortress of the "impious and wicked". Dominating both the city and the surrounding countryside, it was occupied not only by a Greek garrison but by their Jewish confederates as well.Sievers (1994), pp. 195–208.
The Seleucid suppression of Jewish religious life met with considerable resistance among the native population. While Antiochus was occupied in the east during 167 BCE, a rural priest, Mattathias of Modiin, raised a rebellion against the empire.Rocca (2008), p. 4. Both the Seleucid administration and the local Hellenized faction failed to grasp the magnitude of the revolt. In 164 BCE Judas Maccabaeus liberated Jerusalem and reconsecrated the Temple. Although the surrounding city had fallen, the Acra and its inhabitants held out. Maccabaeus besieged the fortress, whose inhabitants sent an appeal to the Seleucid king (now Antiochus V) for assistance. A Seleucid army was dispatched to put down the revolt. When it laid siege to Beth-Zur, Maccabaeus was forced to abandon his siege of the Acra and face Antiochus in battle. In the subsequent Battle of Beth-Zechariah, the Seleucids won their first victory over the Maccabees, and Maccabaeus was forced to withdraw. Spared from capitulation, the Acra persisted as a Seleucid stronghold for 20 more years during which it weathered several Hasmonean attempts to oust the Greek garrison.Schiffman (1991), pp. 77–79.
Destruction
Judas was killed in 160 BCE and succeeded by his brother Jonathan, who attempted to build a barrier to cut off the Acra's supply line. Jonathan had already assembled the manpower required for the task when he was forced to confront the invading army of Seleucid general Diodotus Tryphon at Beth Shan (Scythopolis).Schäfer (2003), pp. 55–56. Having invited Jonathan to a friendly conference, Tryphon had him seized and murdered. Jonathan was succeeded by another brother, Simon, who besieged and finally captured the Acra in 141 BCE.B. Mazar (1975), pp. 70–71, 216.
Two sources provide information about the ultimate fate of the Acra, although their accounts are contradictory in places. According to Josephus, Simon razed the Acra after ousting its inhabitants, and then quarried the hill on which it had stood to render it lower than the temple, purge the city of its evil memory and deny it to any future occupier of Jerusalem.Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 13:215–217 The account appearing in 1 Maccabees paints a different picture:
Thus in this version, Simon did not immediately demolish the Acra, but instead had it occupied and may even have resided within it himself. 1 Maccabees does not mention its ultimate fate. The fortress had been built as an internal checkpoint to monitor and control Jerusalem and its population. If situated in the City of David as most scholars agree, its location would have added very little to Jerusalem's defenses against external threats. It may have fallen out of use and been dismantled around the end of the 2nd century BCE following the construction of the Hasmonean Baris and Hasmonean Palace in Jerusalem's upper city.
Bezalel Bar-Kochva offers a different theory: The Acra was still standing in 139 BCE when Antiochus VII Sidetes demanded it back from Simon, along with Jaffa and Gezer, two Hellenized cities Simon had captured.Dequeker (1985), p. 207. Simon was willing to discuss the two cities but made no mention of the Acra. It was at this point that he must have sealed its fate, as a way to deny the Seleucids any future claim or hold on Jerusalem. Thus, when Antiochus VII subdued the city during Hyrcanus I's reign, each and every one of his demands were met—except the one demanding the stationing of a Seleucid garrison in the city.Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 13:247 Hyrcanus may have been able to reject, and Antiochus to drop, this demand because there was nowhere to billet the garrison, as the Acra would no longer have been standing. This explanation places the razing of the Acra somewhere in the 130s BCE.Bar-Kochva (2002), pp. 445–465.
Acra during the First Jewish–Roman War Josephus describes Acra, or the "Lower City", during the outbreak of the First Jewish–Roman War. He makes known the internecine struggle between two Jewish factions, the one led by John of Gischala who controlled the Temple Mount and part of the Lower City, including the Ophel and the Kidron Valley, and the other led by Simon bar Giora who controlled all of the "Upper City" where he made his place of residence in the Phasael tower before abandoning it,Josephus (1981), The Jewish War 5.4.3. (5.156) and part of the "Lower City" (Acra) as far as the great wall in the Kidron Valley and the fountain of Siloam.Josephus (1981), The Jewish War 5.6.1 (5.248).Josephus (1980), p. 296. Eventually, when the Roman army took the Lower City (Acra), they set fire to all its houses.Josephus (1981), The Jewish War 6.6.3 (6.351). The palace of the Adiabene Queen Helena, the proselytess to Judaism, was formerly situated in the middle of Acra.
Location