Who was Herodias in the Bible?

Grandson of Herod the Great, and son of Aristobulus and Berenice. He was appointed by the emperor Caligula to the government of Ituraea and Abilene, with the title of king. Eventually he had the government of Judaea and Samaria given to him by Claudius. He was an observer of the law of Moses, and added to the extent of Jerusalem by a wall on the north of the city. It was he who put to death James the son of Zebedee to please the Jews, and imprisoned Peter, who was miraculously delivered. His miserable end is recorded in Acts 12.

Son of Herod the Great by Malthace a Samaritan. He succeeded his father in the tetrarchy of Galilee and Peraea. This was he whom the Lord called 'that fox.' He heard John the Baptist 'gladly,' yet put him to death. He was present at Jerusalem when the Lord was before Pilate, and by the courtesy of Pilate they settled their difference; but he treated the Lord with brutal indignity. He had married a daughter of Aretas king of Arabia, but subsequently induced Herodias the wife of Philip, his own half-brother, to leave her husband and live with him. This led to the death of John the Baptist by her desire, as recorded in scripture; and also to his being attacked and defeated with great loss by Aretas. Prompted by Herodias, he sought from the emperor Caligula the title of king (which did not belong to him though so called in Mark 6:14), but this ambition led to his perpetual banishment, A.D. 39. Herodias voluntarily accompanied him.

HEROD ANTIPAS was the second son of Herod the Great. He became tetrarch of Galilee, and is chiefly noticed in Scripture because of his relations with John the Baptist. Herod had committed the grievous sin of persuading his brother Philip’s wife to desert her husband and marry him. John had faithfully rebuked Herod to his face, thus incurring his anger, as also that of his unlawful wife, Herodias, who nursed bitter revenge in her heart. Herod flung John into prison, and would have killed him, but he feared the people, who esteemed him as a prophet.

The day came when Herod gave a birthday supper to his lords, chief captains and chief estates of Galilee. On this august occasion the daughter of Herodias danced before the assembled company, and so captivated Herod, that for a reward he offered her even to the half of his kingdom. Here was the occasion for Herodias to carry out her design of revenge. She instructed her daughter to ask for the head of John the Baptist on a charger. The King was exceedingly sorry, yet for his oath’s sake sent an executioner to carry out his gruesome order. When the head of this man of God, gory and dripping with blood, was handed on a charger to the daughter of Herodias, she carried it to her mother. However, this unhappy marriage soon reaped its sad fruit.

In Matthew 14, then, we get in a short historical setting a vivid description of the moral corruption of things in Israel's land. Shortly, the case was this. Herod Antipas was a son of Herod, miscalled "the Great," of Matthew 2. He was the wicked son of a wicked father. At the death of Herod I. the kingdom was divided by the Romans, and Herod Antipas became "tetrarch" of Galilee, with the courtesy title of "king." He married a daughter of Aretas, King of Arabia, but afterwards made guilty overtures to Herodias, his brother Herod Philip's wife. Nothing loth, the profligate wanton responded, and the two were living in open sin.

The righteous reproof of the fearless prophet rankled in the revengeful heart of the wicked woman, and, when the opportunity arose, she was ready to embrace it, in order to satiate her hatred. Herod, in spite of his conscience, became a pliant tool in her guilty hands.

Herodias' daughter danced, and John the Baptist died.

Let a man but start on the downward road, and the devil is never at a loss for some one to put a hand on his back to push him on. So it was with Herod, and in such a setting Israel's ruler is shown to us. An oppressor, an adulterer, a proud boaster, and a murderer; and yet the king. It reveals how the very foundations of virtue were gone, and utter moral and spiritual corruption ruled in the kingdom of men. What marked Herod's dance, and every similar dance since, was the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life; and the end of these things is death.

The Herod mentioned here is not the Herod in the second chapter of the Gospel. The Herod under which the children of Bethlehem were slain was Herod the Great, an Idumean who had been proclaimed king of the Jews by Rome and exercised his evil reign under the protection of Rome. After his death Archelaus became tetrarch of Judea, Samaria and Idumea, Philip of Trachonitis and Herod Antipas of Galilee and Peraea, who also had the title of tetrarch. It is this Herod who is before us in this chapter He was married to a daughter of King Aretas of Arabia. He lived, however, in open adultery with Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip. Like his father, Herod the Great, he was a wicked man, the murderer of John the Baptist. He was followed by Herod Agrippa, under whose regime the persecution of the Christians broke out in Jerusalem.

Herod, as seen in the Gospels, was a weak-minded, impressionable man. Thus, the straight talk of the prophet impressed him. The presence of his lords and captains at his feast excited him. The dancing of the daughter of Herodias before him and his guests carried him away in a whirl of exuberant pleasure. Devoid of all self-control, he gave utterance to the most extravagant promises: "Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee," he said, adding no qualifications. And to show that this was not mere Eastern hyperbole, he confirmed his promise with oaths. The man who inherited a fourth of his father's kingdom swore to the damsel, "Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me I will give it thee unto the half of my kingdom." In such a wild impetuous way do infatuated and inebriated men sometimes speak. So Ahasuerus more than once promised Esther to grant her petition up to the half of his kingdom (Esther 5:3, 6; Esther 7:2), and Herod may have foolishly thought to emulate the great world-emperor in this boastful pledge.

Receiving such an unlimited promise, the damsel sought advice from her mother, who according to Eastern custom was not present at the banquet. Such consultation was in itself a proper step to take. Alas, that her mother could only counsel her for evil and not for good. It would seem that Herodias had plotted for this issue. She had set a trap for Herod and baited it with her own daughter. Knowing his disposition, she counted upon some such promise from the monarch when well in his cups. And now the "convenient" moment had come. The sweets of revenge being more to her than half Galilee, she instructed her daughter to ask for the head of John the Baptist.*

The depraved instincts of Herodias appear also in the daughter, for returning with haste to the king, she delivered the message of her mothers with additions of her own. On comparison of the words of the mother with those of the damsel, it would seem that it was the daughter who desired that the gruesome reward should be handed to her upon a dish in the presence of all the guests. She demanded also that the hideous gift might be made to her immediately, being fearful lest the weak-minded king might repent of his rash vow, and recall his promise. Give it me here, she said with incredible savagery (Matt. 14:8); let me have it at once on a platter. A guardsman was accordingly sent there and then on the errand of execution, and in the presence of the assembly of rank and nobility, the shameless damsel received her chosen reward, and carried the trophy of blood on the dish to her mother as her share of the feast.

David took the head of Goliath, the uncircumcised enemy of Jehovah and His people, to Jerusalem, but that was an act of retributive justice, and a witness to the deliverance of the nation. The repulsive action of Herodias and her daughter was the gratification of their private revenge on John the Baptist because he had condemned Herodias' uncle, Herod, whose wife was still living for having his niece, Herodias, whose husband was also alive.

Moreover, that conscience was appealed to by the dauntless testimony of the Baptist. For John came "in the way of righteousness." Like Noah, he was a "preacher of righteousness" in a day of unnatural corruption. Like also his prototype Elijah, he delivered his words of truth in a profligate court. John reproved the king for the many notorious evils he had committed; but perhaps his blackest crime was to marry his brother Philip's wife, and the intrepid prophet did not shrink to denounce the incestuous adulterer to his face, although he sat upon a throne, condemning him by the laws of God and man (Lev. 18:16; Lev. 20:21). "It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife" summed up his charge. The king's guilt was trebly great; for the wife of Herod was alive, the husband of Herodias was alive, and Herod and Herodias stood in the relationship of uncle and niece. But there was no repentance. The words of John did not turn this disobedient one "to the wisdom of the Just" (Luke 1:17). Herod hardened his heart, and as the Spirit of God says, in view no doubt of the ancient precept, "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm," that he "added yet this above all, that he shut up John in prison," and would have done worse to him, but "when he would have put him to death he feared the multitude because they counted him as a prophet" (Matt. 14:5). This popular opinion in favour of John was so strong that the chief priests and elders also feared to oppose it (Matt. 21:26).

It was the son of this man who ruled as Tetrarch in Galilee at the time of the crucifixion. He was called Herod Antipas. What religion the father had was of an architectural nature, but the son liked a good sermon: he "sat under" John the Baptist and "heard him gladly." (Mark 6:20.) "Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things … " and that is more than everyone who "sits under" a popular preacher does. So that "he was not all bad." No, but in a sense he was worse than if he had been. Notwithstanding all this he continued to live in the vilest debauchery, eventually murdered his religious teacher, and joined himself with the royal and priestly conspirators who put to death the Son of God. When men show a religious tendency and at the same time live bad lives, it is usual to speak of them as hypocrites, to impute to them deliberate deception; but this is often very incorrect. Such men as Herod Antipas are entirely and morbidly sincere in their religion. Their consciences are not conveniently hardened like those of men of the nature of Herod the Great, or Nero, who took a distinct pleasure in doing evil. A conscience at any time may be said to be an inconvenient and expensive thing to keep; but a conscience like that of Antipas, just strong and superstitious enough to worry and haunt him with his misdeeds, (Mark 6:16) but not strong enough to keep him from perpetrating them, must be almost intolerable. It is difficult to understand how such a man could be an object of affection to any living creature; and yet Herodias, vile-natured as she was, going from one of her half-brothers to another, subtle instigator of murder and worse, — Herodias left everything for him, first her husband and her honourable position, and finally followed him to Gaul into poverty and banishment when he was subsequently disgraced.

He was by no means a weak man. He would not have slain the Baptist at the direct desire of either Herodias or her daughter, but they entrapped him through his superstitious regard for his oath. The man is blessed who "keeps his oath to his own hurt;" but Herod kept it to the hurt of another. In the end it amounted however to the same thing as if he were weak: a woman and a wicked one, ruled the state, but the man, though a usurper, had taken the position and could not divest himself of his responsibility. When one like that rules, everything rests on an unstable and capricious basis. This was how at a certain time the Greeks said a child ruled the world, "because Europe ruled the world and 'of course' Greece ruled Europe: of course also Athens ruled Greece, and Themistocles ruled Athens; then, of course, the wife of Themistocles ruled him; and naturally her little boy ruled her." When things are arranged in this inverted manner, they cannot last long. It is like reversing a pyramid to balance it on its apex. The experiment is interesting, but the result hardly doubtful.

The third point to be noticed now is the solemn history of conscience in King60 Herod, who, on hearing the fame of Jesus, imputed the miracles to John the Baptist, as risen from the dead. There was the usual variety of opinion and uncertainty among men, but Herod's bad conscience made him positive that it was John, whom he had beheaded. What a torment even here it is, unless in the yet more desperate case of those who are religiously seared! The Holy Spirit then turns aside to give the account of the circumstances, and to explain why Herod was thus uneasy and perplexed. The wicked Herodias, whom the tetrarch had guiltily married, though she was his brother's wife, had sought her revenge in vain. For, spite of his censure, John stood high in Herod's esteem as a just and holy man; and Herod, having heard Him, did much, and listened gladly. But there the fair show ended. Satan found the way to shut him up to a course from which there was no escape, save by repentance and the acknowledgment of his sins. It grew out of a royal revel where Herodias' daughter† danced to the content of Herod and his guests, and drew from the king the rash promise, with an oath, to give her what she asked, to the half of his kingdom. Now was the opportunity of the vindictive adulteress, who instructed her daughter to demand at once the head of John the Baptist upon a dish. And the king (whose fear for John had no higher source than nature), while very sorry, yields for the sake of his character before his guests,immediately sends one of the guard to despatch the prisoner,62 and presents his head to the damsel, as she also does to her mother. What an evident net of Satan's laying for the feet of one who was not without feeling! and how powerless is conscience where God's servant is in one scale and the poor plighted honour of man in the other! How simple it all is in God's presence! The devil's promises are better broken than kept. "Did many things": so ACD, etc., all cursives, Old Lat. Syrsin hcl, etc. (see note 61 at end). Edd. follow ABL, Memph. for "was perplexed." †"The daughter of the same Herodias": so Nestle, etc., with AC, later uncials, most cursives, all vv. (including Syrsin). Hort "His daughter Herodias," which is the reading of ℵBDLΔ.

It was the occasion of a war between Herod and Aretas king of Arabia. Herod had married the daughter of Aretas but when he became infatuated with Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, he sought to divorce the daughter of the king of Arabia. In the war that ensued Herod’s army was destroyed. Josephus commenting on this says, “Some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the people to exercise virtue, both as righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God” (Antiquities B. 18, C. 5).

But that is not the end of the tragic story. Herodias, who urged Herod to this tragic and evil deed concerning John the Baptist, was highly ambitious, which proved the undoing of her husband. She urged him to go to Rome to seek equal honours to those enjoyed by her brother, Agrippa. She could not endure to see her brother in a place superior to that of her husband. At first Herod’s love of ease led him to refuse her wishes, but by her importunity night and day at last she prevailed. Herod went to Rome accompanied by Herodias, and preferred his request to Caesar, but suspicion fell upon him when it became known that in his armoury he had sufficient armour for seventy thousand men, to which allegation he had to confess. The result was he was charged with preparing for rebellion. Instead of rising to greater honour, he was sentenced to perpetual banishment to Lyons, Gaul (France). Herodias shared his punishment, Josephus remarking, “Thus did God punish Herodias for her envy at her brother, and Herod also for giving ear to the vain discourses of a woman” (Antiquities B. 18, C. 7).

Son of Herod the Great: he married Herodias, who deserted him to live with his brother, Herod Antipas. Matt. 14:3; Mark 6:17; Luke 3:19.

Another son of Herod the Great: he was tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis. Luke 3:1. He was the founder of Caesarea Philippi. Matt. 16:13; Mark 8:27.