1 Machabees
Liber I MachabæorumIntroductions
Enciclopedia Cattolica
There are two "deuterocanonical" books of the Old Testament, which narrate the revolt led principally by Judas Maccabeus. Each book is an original work; although they have their subject matter in common, they are distinct in author, language, purpose and especially in their chronological data. I Maccabees indeed covers a period of about 41 years, from the beginning of the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175-63 B.C.) up to the killing of Simon, leader of the new Jewish State (135 B.C.). II Maccabees, beginning from the last times of Seleucus Philopator, predecessor of Antiochus Epiphanes, stops at the death of Judas Maccabeus (161), thus comprising a span of about 14 years.
Haydock
These Books are so called, because they contain the history of the people of God under the command of Judas Machabeus and his brethren; and he, as some will have it, was surnamed Machabeus from carrying on his ensigns, or standards, those words of Exodus xv. 11., "Who is like to thee among the strong, O Lord;" in which the initial letters, in the Hebrew, are M. C. B. E. I. It is not known who was the author of these books. But as to their authority, though they are not received by the Jews, saith St. Augustine, (liber XVIII., City of God, chap. 36.) they are received by the Church; who, in settling her canon of the Scriptures, chose rather to be directed by the tradition she had received from the apostles of Christ, than by that of the Scribes and Pharisees. And as the Church has declared these two books canonical, even in two general councils, viz., Florence and Trent, there can be no doubt of their authenticity. (Challoner) --- The most ancient Fathers, Clement, (Strom. i.) St. Cyprian, (1 ep. III. ad. Cornel.) St. Ambrose, (Off. I. 41., etc.) quote them as divine; and the third Council of Carthage, Trent, etc., have inserted them in the canon. Though (Worthington) St. Jerome did not translate (Calmet) or urge them against the Jews, he had a great regard for them. (In Daniel i., and xi., etc.) The texts to which Protestants object, will be explained. They are not more difficult than many which occur in the Books of Kings and Paralipomenon. Other books have been formerly contested, which they now admit. The author of the second book seems to have designed at first only to insert two supplements. He then resolved to abridge the work of Jason, and hence added a preface, (chap. 2:20.) which may be first perused. He then gives an account of some who had suffered death for the truth; and in the eighth and following chapters, the victories of the Machabees, which had been partly recorded in the first book, are specified, with some fresh circumstances. Judas was styled the Machabee for his strength and valour, (Worthington) being "the scourge" of God, (Haydock) or because he was an exterminator. (Menochius) --- Yet the etymology is not well ascertained. That given above, Zacharias 12:5.; (Haydock) or M. C. B. I. (Buxtorf; Prideaux, etc.) seems to be overthrown, by the Syriac having always k instead of c, which is the case in two Chaldean manuscripts. These may not contain a truer history, but they rectify several mistakes in the printed copies. (Kennicott) --- St. Jerome found the first of these books in Hebrew, the second in Greek. (Ep. 106.) We have a third also in Greek, in the Complutensian Bible; as well as a fourth, mentioned by Sixtus, (Bib. i.; Worthington) "on the administration of Hircan," (Calmet) to which reference seems to be made [in] 1 Machabees xv. 24., (Worthington) though what is extant be a work of no authority. "The empire of reason," falsely attributed to Josephus, and printed among his works, is more probably the fourth book, known to the ancients. Neither of these latter were ever deemed canonical by any authentic decree. (Worthington) --- Many have indeed ranked the with the other contested works: but now it is generally agreed that they belong not to the sacred Scriptures, as the two former do. On these (Calmet) indeed, as almost on all the sacred books, (Haydock) authors have varied: but he most respectable and the most numerous declare in their favour. To arrange the four books in chronological order, we must make the first and third exchange places. This last can obtain its title only inasmuch as the Jews of Alexandria, who were persecuted by Philopator, and miraculously delivered, were animated with the same sentiments of piety and heroism as the rest of the Machabees. (Calmet) See Ecclesiasticus l. 1, 21, 23. (Haydock) --- The authors of the first and second books relate many of the same events; yet seem not to have seen each other's works. The latter follows the Greek chronology, dating from Tisri, September and October, (Calmet) the year of the world 3828 to 3843, (Haydock) while the former dates from Nisan, (Calmet) our March or April, the year 3829 to 3869. The third book gives an account of Philopator's persecution in Egypt, the year 3787. The fourth, from the year 3869 to 3698, (Haydock) is little known among the Latins. Calmet gives two copies, the one regarding Hircan and the other "the government of reason," or the martyrdom of the Machabees, the year 3837; (Haydock) the author of which last seems to have been a Stoic. (Calmet) --- We shall pass them[3 Machabees and 4 Machabees] over, with Protestants, as they are not received by the Catholic Church. (Haydock)
Douay 1582/1609
The argument of the bookes of Machabees, with other prooemial Annotations. 6 paragraphs
BEFORE we declare the contents, the reader perhaps wil require to Prooemial questiōs touching these bookes. know, why they are called the Bookes of MACHABEES: how manie they be; who writ them; in what language; & especially whether al, or anie, or which of them are Canonical Scripture? For satisfaction of al which demandes, distinguishing betwen certaine and vncertaine, we shal briefly shew that which semeth more probable in the doubtful pointes; and the assured certaintie of that which is decided by the Catholique Church of Christ. They are called Machabees of Iudas Machabeus. Iudas had this surname for his streingth and val⸢ur⸣e. Concerning therefore the name and inscription. S. Ierom, very probably supposeth that these Bookes haue their title of Iudas MACHABEVS; the narration of whose heroical vertues, and noble Actes occupieth the greatest part of this whole historie. And this surname Machabeus signifying valient of streingth (or by an vsual hebrew contraction, Mobi, more explicated, Milchamach Coach bihuda, that is, Force of battel, or Streingth in Iuda) was geuen him by his father Mathathias, when before his death disposing of his sonnes & exhorting them, he sayd to them al: You my sonnes take corege, and doe manfully in the law, because in it you shal be li. 1. c. 2. v. 64, 65, & 66. glorious. And behold Simon your brother I know that he is a man of counsel: heare ye him alwayes, and he shal be father to you. Next headdeth: And Iudas Machabeus, valient of streingth from his youth, let him be to you the prince of warfayre, and he shal manage the battel of the people. And from him this name was also ascribed Others also called Machabees. to his bretheren, and to al the rest that ioyned with them either in the holie warres, or otherwise shewed their valure, professing Gods law in spiritual combate euen to death. As Nicetas writeth in Orat. 22. S. Greg. Nazian. li. 2. c. 6. & 7. VVherupon old Eleazarus and the seuen young bretheren, with their mother are also called Machabees.
There be in al, foure bookes called Machabees. The first S. Ierom There be foure bookes. found in Hebrew, the second in Greke, as he testifieth Epist. 106. The third is also extant in Greke, and Latin in Biblijs Complutensibus. The fourth VVritten by vncertaine auctors. The tvvo last are not Canonical. semeth to be that which is mentioned in the end of the first booke. And either v. 24. the same, or an other vnder that title, is also extant in Greke, as testifieth Sixtus Senensis, li. 1. Bibliothecae. VVho writte them is more vncertaine: but most probable euerie one had a diuers auctor. Neither are the two last approued for Canonical by anie authentical auctoritie.
It resteth therfore to speake of the two first, which the Iewes and Protestants Ievves & Protestantes denie also these two first. Their arguments. denie, because they are not in the Hebrew Canon. The Protestants further alleaging that they are not in the former Canon of the Church, before S. Ieroms time. Moreouer obiecting certaine places of these bookes, which they say, are contrarie to sound doctrine, & to the truth of other authentical histories; or contradictorie in themselues. None of which thinges can procede from the Holie Ghost, the principal auctor of al Diuine Scriptures. Al which textes we shal more conueniently explicate, according to their true sense, in li. 1. c. 1. v. 1. 7. 11. & 57. ch. 4. v. 52. ch. 6. v. 16. ch. 8. v. 16. li. 2. ch. 1. v. 19. ch. 2. v. 25. ch. 12. v. 43. ch. 14 v. 41. ch. 15. v. 39. Euseb. li. 3. c. 25. hist. S. Ierom de viru illustrib. their proper places. As for the exception, that these bookes are not in the Canon of Ansvvers. the Iewes, it is answered already (Praef. Tobiae.) that the Canon of the Christian Catholique Church is of souereigne auctoritie, though the Iewes Canon haue them not. Finally wheras these bookes were not canonized in the former General Councels, it sufficeth that they are since declared to be Canonical, & Diuine Scripture, as some other partes haue likewise bene, which English Protestants do not denie. As the Epistle of S. Iames, the second of S. Peter, the second and third of S. Iohn, and S. Iudes epistle: of al which Eusebius, and S. Ierom testifie, that some lerned Fathers doubled sometimes, whether they were Apostolical or no. But afterwards the same, with these two bookes of Machabees, and others were expresly declared to be Diuine Scripture, by the third Councel of Carthage, can. 47. By the Councel of seuentie Approued by Councels. Bishops vnder Gelasius, though by the name of one booke, as also Esdras and Nehemias as but one booke. Last by the Councels of Florence, and Trent.
If anie further require the iudgement of more ancient Fathers, diuers doe And by Ancient. Fathers. alleage these bookes as Diuine Scriptures. S. Dyonise, c. 2. celest. Hierar. S. Clemens Alexan. li. 1. Stromat. S. Cyprian li. 1. Epist. ep. 3. ad Cornelium. li. 4. ep. 1. & de exhort. ad Martyrium. c. 11. Isidorus li. 16. c. 1. Etym. S. Gregorie Nazianzen hath a whole Oration of the seuen Machabees Martyrs, and their mother. S. Ambrose li. 1. c. 41. Offic. But to omite others, albeit S. Ierom vrged not these bookes against the Iewes, yet he much estemed them, as appeareth in his commentaries vpon Daniel. c. 1. 11. & 12. S. Augustin most clerly auoucheth li. 2. c. 8. de doct. christ. & li. 18. c. 36. de ciuit. that notwithstanding the Iewes denie these bookes, the Church holdeth them Canonical. And wheras one Gaudentius an heretike alleaged for defense of his haeresie the example of Razias, who slew him self. 2. Mac. 14. S. Augustin denieth not the auctoritie of the booke, but discusseth the fact, and admonisheth that it is not vnprofitably receiued by the Church; si sobrie legatur, vel audiatur: if it be read, or heard soberly. VVhich was a necessarie admonition to those Donatistes: who not vnderstanding the holie Scriptures, depraued them (as S. Peter speaketh of like heretikes, •p. 2. c. 3.) to their owne perdition.
Now touching the contentes, a great part of the same historie, which is The same contentes of both the bookes. written in the former booke, is repeted in the second, with such varietie of some thinges added, some omitted, as in the bookes of Kinges and Paralipomenon: and as the Gospel is written by the foure Euangelistes. Ioyning therfore these Foure principal partes. two bookes together, the Concordance therof conteyneth foure principal partes. The Preface; the Historie: an Appendix, & the Conclusion. But the three former partes are very extraordinarily disposed. For the The occasion of so extraordinarie disposition. writer of the second booke (who doubtles was a distinct person from him that writte the former) first of al added an Appendix to the historie (written before) making mention of two Epistles, and reciting the summe of one of them, in the first chapter and part of the second, as though he meant to haue writte no more of the same matter. But then, as it may seme vpon new resolution, intending to abridge the historical bookes of Iason, maketh a preface to ••. 2. c. 2. v. 24. his worke, in the rest of that second chapter. And so prosecuteth his purpose: and finally maketh a briefe conclusion in the three last verses of the same second booke. The mayne historie conteyneth two special partes. The The historie conteyneth tvvo partes. first sheweth the state of Gods peculiar people, the Iewish nation, from the beginning of the Grecian Monarchie, parted after the death of Alexander amongst his folowers: of which some did exceedingly persecute the Iewes, by diuers both suttle and cruel meanes, to the ruine of manie, and euen to death and martyrdom of some most constant obseruers of Gods Lawes, and true Religion, til the warres of the Machabees, in the first chapter of the first booke, and in the 3. 4 5 6. and 7. chapters of the second booke. In the other fiftene chapters of the former booke, and other eight of the second, are described the battles, victories, & triumphes of the valient Machabees. Of which holie warres Mathathias was the beginner and first captaine: Iudas the second: the third Ionathas: and Simon the fourth: after whose death his sonne Iohn Hyrcanus succeded Duke and Hieghpriest.
But because these bookes are intermixed the one with the other, whosoeuer An order how to reade these bookes. please to read them in order of the historie, may folow the direction of the Alphabet letters, set in the inner margen, beginning with A. at the twentith verse of the second chapter of the second booke, to the end of the same chapter. Thence procede as the signe of a starre directeth to the next letter B. which is at the beginning of the first booke, the first chapter first verse. And so in the rest. And when the capital letters are ended, the smaller wil direct you.
Cornely
CAPUT XI. DE DUOBUS MACHABAEORUM LIBRIS.,
S8 50. — De utriusque. Machabaeorum libri argumento et fine.
Continue reading 116 paragraphs
150. — Ultimum locum in nostro V. T. canone occupant duo Machabaeorum libri (MaxxaCaiov & et f), qui licet nec ab eodem auctore nec eundem in finem eodemve modo sint conscripti, simul tamen tractentur oportet, quia in iislem fere rebus gestis narrandis versantur et alter alterum complet. MacAaóaeus cognomen est Iudae, tertio Mathathiae sacerdotis filio, ob virtutem fortitudinemque ut videtur inditum, qua Seleucidas populi sui persecutores etoppressores debellabat!. Ab eo autem nomen non tantum in totam eius familiam transiit ?, sed etiam in omnes eius asseclas, qui cum eo fratribusque eius tyrannidem Seleucidarum vi armisque impugnabant, aut avitam fidem in Seleucidarum persecutione tormentis et martyrio profitebantur?. Unde etiam libri nostri-idem sortiti sunt nomen , quoniam Mathathiae filiorumque eius res gestas narrant, quibus contra Seleucidas patriam religionemque defendebant populoque suo libertatem recuperabant *.
Etenim ludaei ex exsilio babylonico reversi, postquam regnante Artaxerxe 1. Esdrae et Nehemiae conatu studioque rempublicam suam restituerant, a regibus persicis dependebant quidem, toto tamen persici imperii tempore secundum suas leges et instituta sub magni synedrii summique sacerdotis regimine quieti degebant. Sub iugo satis duro procul dubio semper erant, magnis oneribus a regibus persicis premebantur, inde ab Esdrae tempore cessaverat prophetia; sed Scribae, qui plerique (uti Esdras ipse) erant ex sacerdotibus, una cum libris sacris anfiquam religionem conservabant, atque istis temporibus, etsi infelicior essel externus populi status, accuratior videtur fuisse legis observantia. Qui rerum status in peiorem mutatus est, quando Persarum regnum per Alexandrum M. destructum et inter duces eius divisum est. Palaestina enim media inter aegyptiacum Ptolemaeorum regnum et inter Seleucidarum imperium asiaticum sita frequens fuit certaminum et bellorum causa et ab utrisque opprimebatur. Quod autem peius fuit, ludaei, quum in continuo commercio cum duobus istis regnis essent, haud pauci Graecorum institutionibus magis minusve delectabantur, : 440 alque salis mullae familiae, praesertim nobiliores, ut ethnicorum irrisiones et oppressiones effugerent, corum mores cultumque exteriorem imitatae patriamque religionem placitis ethnicorum philosophorum adaptare conatae cum gentibus « commiscebantur »?, dum multo plures avitae religioni traditisque ritibus moribusque fideles inhaerentes longius sese a Graecorum consortio retrahebant. Priores « iniqui » et « peccatores » ab Iudaeis fidelibus appellabantur, qui ipsi Asidaeorum nomine sese ab infidelibus distinguebant^.
Alexandro M. mortuo Palaestina primum in Ptolemaeorum potestatem venerat, qui saltem non aperta vi ludacorum religionem persecuti sunt. Atque primus quoque Seleucida, qui Ptolemaeos a. 200. ex Asia expulit, Antiochus IIl. Magnus ludaeis favebat eisque et eorum templo magna privilegia concessit?. Cuius successor Seleucus IV. Philopator, qui primo regni tempore patris exemplum secutus omnes templi icrosolymitani cultusque divini sumtus ex reditibus suis solverat (2 Mach. 3,3), ultimo vitae anno templum spoliare iam est conatus. Verum gravissimam persecutionem excitavit Antiochus IV. Epiphanes (Vulg, Illustris), qua in desperationem coniecti Asidaei ducibus Mathathia sacerdote filiisque eius contra Syros insurrexerunt et continuis quadraginta annorum bellis patriae suae libertatem recuperarunt. Quae bella ARGUMENTUM sunt librorum Machabaeorum *.
Integrum eorum conspectum exhibet prior liber, «qui ab initio regni Antiochi Epiphanis persecutionis historiam enarrare incipit narrationemque usque ad.annum 136., quo mortuus est Simon, ultimus Mathathiae filius, quem libertate recuperata Iudaci sibi pracfecerant « summum sacerdotem et ducem in aeternum, donec veniret propheta fidelis » (2 MacA. 3,3). Paullo altius narrationis suae initium repetens alter Machabaeorum liber citius eam abrumpit; ab ultimo enim Seleuci IV. anno exorsus eam terminat magna victoria illa, qua Iudas Machabaeus a. 161. Nicanore devicto sanctam civitatem liberavit. Prior igitur liber quadraginta, alter sedecim tantum annorum historiam continet, ita ut maior eius pars (2 Mach. 4,7-15,38) paucis prioris libri capitibus (1. Mach. 1,11-7,50) respondeat". Quare si ad temporis rationem attendimus, alter priori aptius praemittitur, ideoque eius analysin priore loco trademus.
Carolus Marlcllus). Alii voro ad Is. 43,17 provocantes illamque scriptionem praeferentes, quam adoptavit Gorionides (Y2212), cui magis respondet Jatina forma Machabaeus (gr. May a6aioj, nomen ad rad. 732 (exstinctum estj referunt, illudque designare volunt ezstinctorem. Fucrunt quoque, qui nomen cx literis initialibus sententiae, quam
Iudas Machab. in signis vexillisque habuisse dicitur (Exod. 15,11: pua 172 M^ aim 1 Quis similis tui in fortibus (inter dcos], Domine »?) vel ex literis initialibus nominis Mathalhiae (m a y nnm) parum recte derivarent.
3. Hinc factum cst, ut septem fratres, qui cum matre sua gloriosum martyrium tempore Antiochi Epiphanis subierunt (2 Mach. 7.), vulgo fratres Machabaei appellentur, quamvis ad Asmonacorum familiam non pertinucrint.
À. Quo cum iure 3 et 4 Mach. libri hoc nomine insigniantur et quid de iis sit sentiendum, dixiinus in Introd. gener. Ed. 2. n. 75. p. 220 sq.
8. Ut facilius intelligatur Machabacorum historia, adscribimus genealogiam Seleucidarum, de quibus in libris nostris agitur. Duo enim post Antiochum M. fuerunt familiae rami, inter quos multae de throno dísceptationes.
Eae e asm OU EEUU C "eaa Demetrius I. Soter — Antiochus V. Eupator — Alexander Balas
151. — « Liber secundus Machabaeorum, inquit P. Goldhagen, variis ex partibus hinc inde conflatus est »!. Quae assertio aliquid veri continet ; duabus enim porlibus prorsus distinctis constat, quae solo auctoris fine ad unitatem quandam rediguntur. Narrationi enim suae de persecutione à Seleucidis excitata et de bellis a Iuda Machabaeo contra eos geslis auctor duas epistolas praemittit, quibus Iudaei ierosolymitani aegyptiacos invitaverunt, ut secum encaeniorum festum mense Caslev celebrandum peragerent. Quarum prior (1,1- 10) scripta est a. 188. acr, Scleuc. (a. 125. 8. Chr. *; altera (1,10-2,19) auni quidein. indicatione caret; quoniam vero « Aristobulum magistrum regis Ptolemaci » (VII. Philometoris 181-156; et Iudam (haud dubie Machabaeum, qui a. 161. occisus est) in inscriptione nominat et recentem
Antiochi Epiphanis mortem (a. 163; commemorat, circa a. 162. data est. Narrationem ipsam, quae verum libri argumentum constituit, ex quinque lasonis Cyrenaei libris se excerpsisse testatur auctor, sed illam non sine arle disposuit. In duas enim sectiones ifa. eam distribuit, ut singulae novi festi instituti relatione terminentur (10,1-9. et. 15,36. 31), et singulae, quum etiam de binorum regum syriacorum rebus gestis agant, in bina membra dividantur; unde conciunitas quaedam partium non iniucunda?. Quarum conspectum exhibet haee 2 Mac. ANALYSIS, in qua. accuratior quoque «argument? descriptio proponitur.
2, Non satis apta versuum divisione annum, quo data prior epistola significatur, ad alteram trahi iam monuit Bellarminus (De verbo Dei I. 15); Graeci cnim, id quod etiam ex epistolis in nostro libro relatis (II. 11,21. 33. 38) apparct, annum et diem epistolae scriptae postponcre solebant. Mensis Caslev autem non ide data. epistola cst intelligendus, quia eadem. exempla docent mensis indicationem poni posl annum, sed addito mense auctor « scenopegiam mensís Caslev » i. e. encaeniorum festum mense nono (Decembre) celebrandum a vera « scenopegia » mense Tiscehri (Octobre) celebranda distingult,
Pro INTRODUCTIONE praemittit auctor duas ludaeorum ierosolymitanorum epistolas, quibus aegypliacos ad encaeniorum festum ob templi lustrationem institutum invitant (1,4-2,19).
1. In priore brevissima (1,1 - 102.) post inscriptionem et salutis apprecationem (1,1 -6) alludentes ad priores literas de eodem teinpore perseculionis Demetrii (a. 144.) conscriptas exhortantur contribules suos, ut secum celebrent « scenopegiam mensis Caslev » i. e. encaenia (14, 7 - 10 a.).
a.) incipit a morte Antiochi Epiphanis narranda, qua a mago periculo liberatus sit populus (1,11 - 17), b.) transit ad invitationem, ut dedicationis lempli et i;juis coelitus post captivitatem dati diem secum celebrent (1,18), c.! alque pro motivo historiam iguis tempore Nehemiae miraculose dati affert. Quem in finem v.) miraculum satis fuse narrat. (1,19- 36^, f.) indicat rationem, cur arca, tabernaculum, altare incensi per leremiam ex priore templo ablata in altero nondum adsint (2,1 - 8), T.alque ad ignem sacrum revertens simile miraculum etiam in primorum sacerdotum consecratione et in prioris templi dedicatione accidisse monet (9,4 - 12).
d.) Nchemiae deinde sollicitudinem in colligendis libris sacris (2,13) imitatum esse refert ludam Machabaeum, Aegyptios igitur ab lerosolymitanis libros sacros, qui forte desint, accipere posse (2,44. 15).
e.) Terminat exhortatione ad festum celebrandum repetita (2,16 - 19).
Pans prion (3,1-10,9) persecutionis historiam narrat usque ad templi pur ifica-
I. Persecutionis praeludium ultimo anno Seleuci 1 V.* (3,4 - 4,6).
1. Persecutionis tentatae occasio (3,1-8). Post longam pacem (3,1-3) Simon, templi praepositus, per Apollonium Seleuco IV. denuntiavit multos thesauros in templo conservari (3,4-6), quare rex Heliodorum misit, qui eos auferret (3,9. 10).
2. Luctus populi de imminente periculo (3,9-22). Heliodorus urbem ingressus ab Oniía summo sacerdote edocetur falsam esse Simonis delationem (3,9-12). Illo autem mandatum regis exsequi volente (3,13. 14) integer populus ieiuniis et precibus Deum rogavit , ut templi sui spoliationem averteret (3,15 - 22).
3. Divino auxilio periculum aversum (3,23- 34). Heliodorus templum ingressus ab apparentibus angelis flagellatus (3,23-28) sed Oniae precibus servatus est (3,29 - 34).
4. Rex Oniae precibus a proposito suo destitit (3,35 - 4,6). Heliodorus reversus regem monuit, ut a spoliando templo abstineret (3,35 - 40); quum vero Simon et Apollonius regem ad novum conatum excitarent, Onias Antiochiam profectus eorum calumnias refutavit (4,1 - 6).
Il. Persecutto ab Antiocho Epiphane excitata? (4,1 - 40,9).
1. Persecutioni occasionem (4,7-3,10) dederunt Iasonis, qui summum sacerdotium magnis pecuniae summis emerat (4,7-9) gentilesque ritus in sanctam civitatem invexerat (4,10-22), cum Menelao, qui templum spoliaverat (4,23- 32) Oniamque occiderat (4,33), continuae de pontificatu disceptationes (4,34-30), quae prima fuerunt causa, cur lerusalem a lasone diriperetur (9,1 - 1), qui ipse apud exteras gentes miser interiit (,8- 10).
a.) Interea Epiphanes timens , ne ludaei a se deficerent, ex expeditione aegyptiaca reversus civitatem sanctam aggreditur, quam plurimos occidit, templum spoliat, Deo id permittente ob populi peccata (3.11 - 20). Quibus non contentus, postquam abiit, exercitum misit, qui etiam. duce Apollonio multos ludaeos interemit (5,21 -26); ludas Machabaeus vero cuin. novem sociis se in deserta loca recepit 5,27).
ANALYSIS 9. MACHAR. A43 b.) Senem quoque misit Epiphanes antiochenum (atheniensem), qui legitimum cultum abrogare idololatriamque introducere (6,1 - 7) vi conabatur, dum proximae civitates, ut eadem violentia uterentur, sunt adduciae (6,8- 11).
c.) Ad singularia facta autem transiturus praemonet auctor Deum haec ad populi correptionem permisisse (6,12-17) atque deinde narrat a.) Eleazari senis constantiam et fortitudinem (6,18 -31) B.) et crudelia tormenta, quae septem fratres cuim matre sua. coram Epiphane (Antiochiae) perpessi sunt (7,1 - 42). 3. Iudaeorum defensio crudelitate regis provocata eorumque victoria (8, 1- 10,10).
a.) ludas Machabaeus interea parva fidelium manu collecta hostes debellare coeperat (8,1- 7, quare Philippus Palaeslinae praefectus auxilium a Coelesyriae duce petiit, qui Nicanorem cum magno exercitu misil (8,8- 11); ludas autem socios suos, qui fideles ei adhaeserunt, fervida concione exhortatus (8,42- 20) Nicanorem devicit (8,21 -29) eiusque duces Bacchidem et Timotheum (8,30- 33), ita ut Nicanor fugiens Deum esse Iudaeorum protectorem profiteri sit coactus (8,34 - 316).
b.) Epiphanes vero, qui infelicem expeditionem in Elyraida susceperat, quum prope Ecbatana cladem Nicanori illatam audisset, ludaeos perdere meditabatur (9,1- 4), sed gravissimo morbo a Deo afllictus (9,3 - 10) de iniustitia sua dolens optima quaeque promisit (9,11-17), immo Iudaeis deprecatoriam epistolam iisit (0,18-27), at misera morte in itinere periit (0,28. 99;.
c.) Interea ludas Machabaeus templo et sancta civitate lustratis (40,1 -5) per octo dies encaenia ad modum. scenopegiae. cum populo celebravit (10,6 - 10).
Pans ALTERA (10,10- 15,33) narrat bella a Iudaeis contra Evpatorein et Demetrium Sot. gesta. ]. Hes gestae sub Antiocho V. Eupatore* (10,10- 13,20). 1. Iudae Machabaei victoriae de Eupatoris ducibus usque ad pacem cum Lysia initam (10,10-11,38).
a.) Plolemaeo, qui Iudaeos aeque tractaverat, veneno exstincto (10, 10-13) Eupator ducem constituit Gorgiam, qui una cum vicinis Idumaeis ludaeos continuo lacessivit (10,14. 15), sed Iudas prius Idumaeorum devictorum munitiones occupavit (10,16- 23), deinde etiam Timotheo, uni ex Syrorum ducibus acerbam cladem intulit eumque oppido Gazara capto interfecit (10,24 - 38), b.) Quibus victoriis exacerbatus Lysias, Eupatoris procurator, novum exercitum contra Iudain. duxit, sed ipse quoque. cladem accepit Deo ludaeos miraculose adiuvante (31,1 -124, quare. pacem. cum Iudaeis inire consultius duxit (11,13-15).
Alferl autem auctor quatuor epistolas, quas de hae. pace dederunt
à.)Iudaei, quum pace frui vellent, continuo lacessebantur a vicinis gentibus (12,1. 2) el primum felix bellum eis erat cum incolis loppe (12,3-9), alterum cum Arabibus (12,10-12), tertium cum civitate Casphin (12,13-16), quartum cum (altero) Timotheo (12,17-25), contra oppida Carnion et Ephron (12,26 -31) demum contra Gurgiam (12,32- 38). ludas vero dona misit lerosolyma, ut pro iis sacrificia offerrentur, qui in ultiino proelio ceciderant (12,39- 46).
b.) Tum. Eupator ipse ludaeis novum bellum inferre statuit (13,1. 2.). Menelaum quidem, qui iterum ab eo summum sacerdotium se obtenturum speravit, velut omnium malorum causam occidit (13, 3-8), sed postquam varia cuin fortuna utrimque pugnatum est, rex (vel potius Lysias) reditu Philippi (qui ab Epiphane procurator Eupatoris nominatus erat) Iudaeis pacem concedere et ludam ducem Palaestinae constituere est coactus (13,9 - 26).
a.) Deinetrius occiso Eupatore throno potitus (14,1. 2) ab Alcimo, quem propter ethnicos mores summo sacerdotio privaverant Iudaei, incilatus Nicanorein in Iudaeam misit, ut Iudam Mach. caperet et Alcimum summum sacerdotem restitueret (14,3 -13.).
b.) Ab initio quidem Nicanor cuin. luda amice egit (14,16- 25), sed a rege, quem Alciinus iterüm incilaverat , ludam vinctum Antiochiam mittere iussus (14,26 - 28) dolo eum capere conatus est; quum vero ludas eius insidias effugisset, summa ira correptus templi minatus est eversionem (14,29-36) et Raziam, unum ex senioribus capere voluit, qui ne ab hostibus indigne tractaretur sibi ipse mortem inlulit (14,37 - 46).
3.) Nicanor, quum ludam copias suas in Samaria collegisse audivisset, euim sabbatho aggredi voluit, sed non potuit (15,1 -6); ludas vero Dco confisus animos militum suorum manifestatione somnii, quod liabuerat, erexit. (15,1 - 26), et humili precatione sese ad pugnam praeparavit (15,22-24).
b.) Deinde cum hoste congressus Nicanoris exercitui acerbissimam cladem intulit (13,23-27); Nicanoris ipsius cadaver inter caesos repertum, caput eius et brachium abscissa lerosolyma deportata sunt (13,28 - 35).
3. In victoriae menioriam institutum. est festum pridie Mardochaei diei (43. Adar) celebrandum (13,36. 37).
In EeiLOGO (13,38- 40) auctor lectoris veniam precatur, si forte libri forma sit displicitura.
152. — PnioR MACHABAEORUM LIBER post historicam introductionem (1,1-2,70), quae mala ab Antiocho Epiphane populo illata recensens occasionem indicat, qua Mathathias filiique eius ad bellum cum Seleucidis gerendum sunt permoti, tribus partibus res gestas Judae Macbabaei (3,1 - 9,22) fratrumque eius lonathanis (9,23-12,51) et Simonis (13, 1-16,16) narrat.
1. ab alto historiam repetens novum rerum statum post. Alexandri M. mortem exortum indicat (1,1 - 10);
2. a quo ad Seleucidarum regnum transiens mala describit ab Epiphane Iudaeis illata (1,11-67).
a.) Quibus occasionem dederunt nonnulli ludaei, qui potestate a rege accepta ethnicos mores lerosolymis invexerunt (1,11 - 16).
b.) Antiochus victor ex Aegyplo revertens (1,17-21) templum ierosolymitanum spoliavit et magnam stragem populi edidit (1,22- 29); duobus annis post princeps tributorum ab eo missus iterum civitatem invasit vastavitque et arcem in ea aedificavit, ut ludaei fugere sint coacti (1,30- 42).
c.) Quibus nondum contentus Epiphanes edicto edito omnes suos subditos idolis servire iussit, in templo idola posuit, omnes qui patriam legem observabant persecutus est (1,43-67).
3. Qua persecutione provocati Mathathias filiique eius vim vi repulerunt (2,1 - 70).
a.) Nam Mathathias cum quinque suis filiis non tantum ipse regis mandatum observare recusavit (2,1-22), sed etiam ludaeum quendam, qui idolis sacrificare volebat, et legatum regis occidit (2,23 - 26).
b.) Quibus peractis in montem fugientes, quum audissent hostes sabbathis Iudaeos aggredi, ut non pugnantes facilius vincerent, sabbathis quoque pugnare statuerunt. Colleclo igitur exercitu (2,21- 43) in magna terrae parte antiquum cultum restituerunt (2,44- 48).
c.) Mathathias moriens filios propositis patrum exeinplis, ut cadem in via pergerent, exhortatus (2,49 -64! Simonem, utpole virum consilii, eis praefecit, sed Iudam voluit esse belli ducem (2,05 - 70).
Pans rnixa (3,1- 9,22) IupaE. MACHABAEI" res gestas narrat. I. Tempore Antiochi 1V. Epiphanis (3,1 - 6,16). 1. Devictis Epiphanis ducibus civitatem sanclam liberavit (3,1 - 4,61).
b.) Quibus devictis ascendit in lerusalem (4,31- A1) el deleto priore altari, utpote contaminalo, exstruxit novum (4,42- 48) et lustrato templo encaenia populus magno cum gaudio celebravit (4,49 - 58), quae in posterum quotannis celebranda statuerunt (4,59 -61).
2. Felicia eius bella contra finitimas gentes (5,1- 68).
à.) Primum devicit Idumaeos et Aimmonitas (5,1-8). Eodem tempore a Galaaditis et a Galilaeis, ut eis succurreret, rogatus misit Simonem in Galilaeam, Iosephum et Azariam reliquit Ierosolymis, ipse abiit in Galaad (8,9 - 19).
b.) Simon devicit hostes Galilacorum (3,20-23), neque minore cum successu pugnaverunt ludas et frater eius Ionathan contra Galaaditas (3,24-31;, sed. losephus et Azarias, quia sua sponte lamniam aggressi erant, devieti sunt a Gorgia (5,55- 62). Iudas autem Idumaeos ineridionales impugnavit, cepit Hebron et Azotum subversis eorum idolis (5,63- 68).
3. Interea Epiphanes re infeliciter in Elymnaide gesta (6,1- 4), quum audisset Iudae victorias, in. mortis languorem incidit et suam erga Iudaeos iniustitiam confessus morle obiit (6,5 - 16).
1. Postquam Lysias Epiphanis fllium Eupatorem regem constituit (6,17), novi belli occasionem dedit praesidium regium in arce ierosolymilana, quam ludas oppugnare conatus est (6,18-27).
2. Magno cum exercitu Syri in Palaestinam irruperunt (0,28-31) et post proelium non infelix apud Bethzachariam (6,32- 47) obsederunt montem Sion. Sed rex a Lysia revocatus, quia Philippus thronum occupare conabatur, pacem iniit cum Iuda, quam non servavit (6,48-63).
1. Prius bellum usque ad victoriam de Nicanore relatam (7,1-50).
a.) Demetrius, qui devicti Eupatoris thronum occupavit (7,1-4), incitatus ab Aleimo summum sacerdotium ambiente (7,5 - 7) Bacchidem misit, ut Palaestinam expugnaret, qui ludam vincere non potuit (1,8-25).
b.) Quare eius in loco missus est Nicanor, qui duobus proeliis victus ipse interiit (8,26- 47), in cuius victoriae memoriam institutum est festum (7,48 - 50).
2. l'oedus initum cum ltomanis (8,1 -32). Quielis tempus, quod secutum est, Iudas, qui multa de Roinanorum fortitudine eorumque administrandi modo audierat (8,1 - 16), adhibuit, ut per legatos foedus cum els iniret /8.17- 32).
3. Mors Iudae. Machabaei (9,1-32). Interea Demetrius Bacchideim et Alciminin cum novo exercitu in Palaestinam misit; ludas vero, quamvis eius exercitus repellendis hostibus impar esset (9,1-9), tamen fugere noluit, at devictus et occisus est (9,10- 18). Totus autern populus eum delflevit :9,19-22). E
Pans ALTERA (0,233- 12,35) Jonathanis" res gestas narrat.
1. Initia principatus Ionathanis usque ad impii Alcimi mortem (9,23-57).
a^ Mortuo luda Machabaeo desperatis fere rebus ludaei lonathanem sibi elegerunt ducem (9,23 - 31).
b.) Quem, quum ex deserto Thecuae ad vindicandam fratris sui loannis morteri felicem expedilionem contra filios lambri suscepisset (9, 32- 42), Bacchides ad ripam Jordanis aggressus est sed infelici cum successu (9,43- 19).
c.; Bacchides lerosolyma reversus civitates Iudaeae munivit et Alcimus templum destruere coepit ; sed quum impius pontifex subita morte abreptus esset, Bacchides Antiochiam reversus est et terra duobus annis quievit (9,50 - 57).
92. Infelix bellum Bacchidis contra Ionathanem (9,58- 13).
à.; Ab infidelibus ludaeis incitatus Bacchides lonathanem inopinatum capére conatus est, sed lonathan cum suis in Bethbessen seso recopit (9,88 - 02).
b.) Quem insecutus Baccehides sed devictus pacem cum ludaeis inire coactus est (9,63 - 12).
lI. Jonathanis res gextae tempore Alexandri Balae (10,1 -89).
1. Do Syriae throno concertantibus Alexandro Epiphanis iilio et Demetrio atque utroque Iudaeos ad suas partes trahere conante Ionathan contribulibus persuasit , ut Alexandro sese adiungerent (10,1. 41).
2. Ab Iudaeis adiutus Alexander Demetrium vicit et throno occupato ipse et socer eius Ptolemaeus Philometor Ionathanem summum sacerdotem agnoverunt magnisque honoribus exornarunt (10,48-66).
3. Demetrio (Nicatore) conante thronum Alexandri occupare Ionathan fidelis regi adhaesit et Apollonium Demetrii ducem proelio vicit, quare maiores honores ab Alexandro consecutus est (10,67 -89).
lil. Eius res gestae tempore Demetrii Il. Nicatoris et Antiochi VI (M,1-14).
1. Interea. Philometor Alexandro regnum Syriae eripere conatus est, ut illud Demetrio II. traderet (11,1-16), qui Philometore ct Alexandro mortuis revera thronum occupavit (11,19- 19) et ab initio Ionathani favit eique Palaestinam concessit (11,20- 37).
2. Quare etiam novis exortis de throno litigationibus Ionathan Demetrium adiuvit (11,38-51), qui promissis suis non stetit (11,32. 53).
3. Itaque ad Antiochi VI. parles transiit Ionathan ab coque in summo sacerdotio confirmatus una cum fratre suo Simon Demetrium debellavit (11,54- 74).
IV. lonathanis foedera cum Romanis et Spartiatis renovata el finis (12,1-34).
1. Ut potestatem suam confirmaret, Ionathan legatis missis focdus cum Romanis et Spartiatis renovavit (12,1- 23).
2. Nova deinde bella gessit contra Demetrii Il. duces et oppida Iudaeae munivit (12,24- 38), a Tryphone autem, qui ipse quoque thronum Asiae ambiebat, dolo captus est (12,39 - 54).
. Ii lonathanis locum suffectus est Simon frater cius (13,1-9), qui frustra fratreni suum liberare conatus est; nam Tryphon non obstantibus donis receptis Ionathanern et filios eius occidit (43,10-24), quibus Simon exsslruxit sepulerum magnificum in Modin (13,95-30).
2. Deinde ad Demetrii H. parles transiens ab eo literas foederis et amiciliae accepit (13,31 - 14), expugnatis quoque Gaza et arce ierosolymitana laetum egit festum quotannis celebrandum fecitque filium suum loannem (Ilyrcanum) summum exercituum ducem (13,42- 54).
. Deinetrio IL. a Persis devicto Simon cum populo magna fruitus est pace (15,4 - 15). Qna usus foedus cum Spartiatis renovavit (14,16 - 23) et legalos Romam misit, qui suam electionem in summum sacerdotem et ducem hliaereditarium annuntiarent et foedus renovarent (44,24 - 49).
. Deinetrii I. alter filius Antiochus (Sideles) throno occupato oinnia, quae praedecessores ludaeis promiserant , literis amicitiae ad Simonem dalis confirmavit (15,1 - 14), Simonis autem legati Roma revertentes attulerant Romanorum decretum, quo ludaeos velut socios suos finitiiiis gentibus commendabant (15,135-24).
2. Verum Antiochus, postquam adversarium "ryphoneni a Simone. adiutus devicit, promissionum suarum immemor (13,25-37) Cendebaeum ducem suum contra Iudaeos misit (45,38- 41), qui a Simonis filiis loanne el Iuda deviclus est (16,1 - 10).
1. Simon , quuin oinnes ludacae civitates magna cum sollicitudine visitaret, a geuero suo Plolemaeo, Abobi filio, qui summum sacerdotium ambivit, occisus est cum filiis luda et Mathathia (16,14 - 17);
2. sed spe sua frustratus est Ptolemaeus; nam alius ex Simonis filiis, loan-
153. — Quam diversus fuerit riis , quem librorum nostrorum auclores prae oculis habuerunt, facile videbimus, si ad utriusque modum narrandi attentionem nostram converterimus. Auctor enim prioris libri, quamvis interdum poetico dicendi genere atque satis frequenter parallelismo poetico utatur!, in. genere tamen simplici modo singula facta seeundum ordinem eorum chronologicum affert, nec aliud sibi videtur proposuisse, nisi ut memoriam eorum, quae magni illi viri, ludas lonathan Simon, pro avita religione defendenda populique libertate politica vindicanda gesserant , fideli narratione posteris traderet. Admodum raro, quid ipse de rebus gestis sentiat, innuit potius quam exprimit?; rarissime (vel nunquam) propria Dei nomina (Deus vel Domnus) adhibet?; nibiloninus integer liber fervorem quendam spirat religiosum, et si auctor suos ipse sensus pios tacet, in orationibus et precationibus, quas. referb, frequentissime reperitur memoria magnorum miraculorum, quibus Deus olim populum adiuvit, atque sincera ubique eernitur fiducia, eundem Deum suos non esse dereliclurum, dummodo ipse ab eis non derelinquatur*. Etsi igitur cum hebraico libro Esther eatenus conveniat, quod nomen Dei raro adhibeat, longissime tamen ab eo differt, quia multo frequentius et disertius ad Deum omnia reducat. Quibus non obstantibus fatendum est, inter reliquos V. T. libros historicos vix reperiri alium, qui propius ad historicos profanos accedat ; at illud quoque est agnoscendum, simplici sua rerum gestarum narratione auctorem in legentium animis pios ciere affectus eosque efficacissime ad veram fiduciam adducere.
A quo narrandi modo omnino discedit alterius libri auctor. Qui ipse quoque summa quidem cum fide historica res gestas ordine etiam chronologico plerumque servato refert, sed continuo quid ipse de rebus narratis sentiat diserte exprimit. Frequenter enim monet lectores suos, ludaeos utpote populim a Deo electum speciali eius providentia regi, ita ut tribulationes, quibus ab ethnicis afficiantur, poenae sint legis violatae5; quare templum magno miraculo a Deo esse protectum, quamdiu lex sit observata; quam primum autem templum ab ipsis sacerdotibus sit profanatum, populum ab ethnicis esse afflictum, quorum institutiones moresque sit aemulatus?; hostibus Deum potestatem nocendi non concedere, nisi ut populus ad Legis observantiam reducatur; poenitenti populo Dominum semper concurrere atque inimicos populi fidelis tantis afficere poenis, ut ipsi magnitudinem et potestatem veri Dei, contra cuius sanctuarium et populum impie ac proterve egerint, ante mortem suam confiteri cogantur?. Eadem igitur ratione, qua plerorumque librorum historicorum V. T. auctores, etiam noster didacticum et paraeneticum finem sibi proposuit; quem accuratius definiemus, si ad modum attenderimus, quo de templo loquitur.
Templum enim ierosolymitanum est velut centrum totius narrationis; à templo inchoatur, templo terminatur, vix ulla invemtur pericope, in qua templum non celebretur. Etenim epistolae duae, quae narrationi sunt praemissae, ad dedicationem templi celebrandam invifant, atque altera. praesertim narratione sua de igne Nehemiae tempore coclitus dato videtur demonstrare voluisse, secundum templum, elsi arca foederis in eo nondum adsit, tamen non minus placere Deo, quam prius templum et mosaicum tabernaculum, quac igni coelesti sunt dedicata?. Narrationis prior pars inchoatur a templo miraculose conservato, et altera a periculo, quod iterum templo imminebat; ambae autem terminantur relatione de festis propter templum purificatum et conservatum perenniter institulis?. Hostes puniuntur, quia templum violaverant vel blasphemaverant; nam templum non solis Iudaeis est Sacrum, sed est « famosissimum in toto orbe », « sanctissimum universae terrae » (40 mon; Tíüg q56 &yuorra ov tegóv) , quod « ipsi reges et principes (ethnici) summo honore dignum duxerunt et maximis muneribus illustrarunt » '?. Quibus omnibus procul dubio auctor contribulibus suis templum velut centrum unitatis religiosae et politicae commendare sibi proposuit, ut non solos ludaeos palaestinenses ad illud honorandum et visitandum incitaret, sed multo magis ludaeos illos, qui in dispersione degebant, commonefaceret , ne unquam sanctae civitatis et templi ierosolymitani obliviscerentur. Quam ob causarn narrationi suae praemittit duas illas epistolas, quibus ludaei aegyptiaci, qui eo tempore Heliopoli sibi templum exstruxerant !! , ad unici et veri templi consecrationem celebrandam invitantur, atque eandem ob causam commemorationem lustrati per Iudam Mach. templi monet ex « communi praecepto et decreto universae genti Iudaeorum » quotannis peragendam esse (2 Mach. 10,8). Quapropter iure concludimus, auctorem librum suum proxime ludaeis Hellenistis destinasse, id quod etiam iam ex graeca lingua, qua usus est, satis apparet, dum prioris libri auctor, qui hebraice scripsit, ludaeos palaestinenses maxime prae oculis habuit.
rabbinis haud. infrequenter NIDV) (nomen) aut. NYI2 vel QYOU) (coelum, coeli) aut alias cireumlocutiones pro nomine Dei adhiberi. Hellenístas vero a nomine 6 0:6; non abstinuisse, 2 Mach. liber ct versio alexandrina ctc. abunde demonstrant.
11. Templum heliopolitanum permittente Ptolemaco Philometore exstructum est paullo post Iudac Machabaei mortem circa a. 160. pcr Oniae If. summi pontificis, quem Antiochus Epiphanes per Menelaum occiderat (2 Mach. 4,35), filium homonymum Oniam IV.
& 4&1. — De utriusque Machabaeorum libri origine et auctoritate,
151. — « Machabaeorum libros qui auctores scripserint, minime constare » olim iam monuit S. Isidorus Hisp. !. Pnionga summo pontifici loanni Hyrcano, Simonis Machabaei filio et successori, deberi haud pauci cum Bellarmino suspicati sunt. Quam sententiam, quatenus loannem ipsum dicit esse auctorem , « tuto credi el sine periculo negari posse » neque nisi « futilibus inniti coniecturis », recte observarunt Huetius et Calnetus?; pro verisimili autem recte admittitur, quatenus librum a ludaeo palaestinensi tempore loannis Hyrcani compositum esse dicit.
Etenim praeprimis constat libri nostri textum primigenium fuisse hebraicum. Etsi enim hodie illum non amplius possidemus, S. /Izeronymus tamen « Machabaeorum primum librum hebraicum se reperísse » testatur, atque Orzgenes « Machabaicorum » titulum hebraicum nobis conservavit, qui priori libro adaptatus certo argumento nobis est, eum primitus hebraice exstitisse? Quae historica testimonia dictione graeca operis non parum confirmantur. Nam quum satis multis in locis auctor textus graeci se graecum sermonem optime calluisse demonstret, multi, quos recepit, hebraismi apte non explicantur, nisi hebraicum exemplar verlisse dicatur *. Accedit quod non desunt lectiones, quas erroneae vocum aut phrasium hebraicarum interprefalioni. deberi manifestum est^. Neque ullo modo sententiae nostrae obstat, quod liber noster graecus in nonnullis expressionibus cum alexandrina aliorum librorum versione consentiat ^; nam graeco interpreti procul dubio versio illa ita fuit familiaris, ut mirum non sit, quod hebraicum suum exemplar vertens ex alexandrina versione nonnullas phrases. desumserit. Mullo minore autem cum iure obiicitur losephum solo textu graeco esse usum atque syriacam versionem etiam à graeco textu dependere ?; aliarum enim Scripturarum quoque graecam versionem plerumque a Iosepho esse adhibitam nemo ignorat, syriaca autem versio librorum satis recens est nec ab eodem interprete, a quo libri protocanonici, est adornata.
Si quis autem ex hebraica primitivi libri lingua demonstrari censeat, ludaeum palaestinensem eius esse auctorem , conclusio haec confirmatur accurata, quam prodit, topographiae palaestinensis scientia; etiam minimae civitates ei erant cognitae et multarum situm tam clare indicat, ut eas de visu cognovisse videatur. Tempore autem loannis Hyrcani eum degisse ultima libri verba suadent : « Et cetera sermonum loannis et bellorum eius et bonarum virtutum, quibus fortiter gessit,... ecce haec scripta sunt in libro dierum sacerdotii eius, ex quo factus. est princeps sacerdotum post patrem suum » (16,93. 25). Quibus verbis indicatur quidem terminus a quo res gestae loannis conscribi sint coeptae in annalibus sacerdotii eius, tacetur autem /erminus ad quem. Quapropter multi interpretes ante eius mortem verba ista esse scripta non temere videntur conclusisse; si enim iam mortuus fuisset , aut uterque terminus positus esset aut neuter; neque enim recte obiicitur zerminum ad quem, utpote superfluum , esse omissum; magis enim superfluus quam terminus a quo non erat. Ceterum illis quoque, quibus haec conclusio non arridet, omnino persuasum est, saltem non diu post Hyrcani mortem (a. 106.) librum esse conscriptum 5.
Neque diu postea hebraicus textus graece videtur esse translatus. Nam ludaei Hellenisiae eum in canonem suum receperunt, Fl. Iosephum autem graecam versionem iam adhibuisse supra monuimus. Ex graeco textu, qui hebraico deperdito nunc nobis est pro primigenio, adornalae sunt antiqua latina versio, quam S. Hieronymus non correxit, et syriaca aliaeque iuniores. Etsi latina et syriaca ab hodierno textu in nonnullis dissentiant paucis quibusdam additis aut omissis aut mutatis, tamen omnino fideles sunt dicendae, atque pleraeque variefates librariorum sive graecorum sive latinorum vel syriacorum incuriae aut corrigendi libidini debentur ?.
2. Bellarm. Controv. de verbo Doi I. 15; Cornel. a Lap. in Mach. Argum. etc. — rum Dei, vel rectius sceptrum. ducale populi. Deí; minus placet altera transcriptio ON 13 "v na", historia principum filiorum Dei, nam NQ*U (res gesta, historia) syriacum quidem, sed non hehraicum cst vocabulum. Origenes hunc titulum indicat ty Mazza6atxiv» , ut duobus libris nostris communis fuisse videatur; quia tamen ín 2 Mach. de principatu. proprie dicto non agitur, ab initio ad solum 1 Mach. perunuisse dicendus est, in quo Iudas Mach. a patro 8uo « princeps (39) militiae» designatur (2,66), lonatliana populo princeps elizitur (9,30), Simon demum haereditarium principatum obtinet (13,8; 14,41). Sceptri igitur ducalis vel regii Iudaeorum historia revera in libro nostro contexitur. Cfr Keil Comm. über die BB. der Makkabàer. Leipzir 1815. p. 22.
Á. Graeci sermonis eum fuisse peritum demonstrat vel sola attractio relativ] (10,12; 11,31. 38; 12,19) et copia verborum praesertim iis In locis, in quibus adest paralle«
5. Parum rectae vocabulorum ct plirasium hebr. interprebiliones; ditx Votg. Hbri pro epistola, EYED L4. V. $6; cfr Heg. 010,00; Ps. 22. Thi; t00$ Ano))louieyu; Vulg. pereuntes pro dispersos (QYTANTI 3,9. cfr 528 oberravit Is. 23,13; Deut. 26,5) 37 al Vulg. ordines pro caterrae (QNO, agmina ludic. 7,16. 20 etei. In melioribus codd. legitur 4.19 £t zYneoDvzos lo39x vadza pro Xa2.o9vzo; (legit interpres NUIT pro Bier 4,24 e))6qoov elg chu odzasby Tow vizvre, a xx? (a8 *2) pro £zt dy2605; 2,8 (ytvezo
& vxus arf o; dolo Kosfos (0333 C NZ n2 clliptiee pro P132: UN Tf22 WI'2. és 2phe 325202; Vulg. etiam « sicut vir ignobilis »). Alia exempla Il. cc.
155. — « Sscuxpvs LipEg. Macuanmakonum, inquit S. Hierongnus, graecus est, quod ex ipsa quoque phrasi probari potest » (Prolog. zal.). Quibus verhis S. Doctor procul dubio integri libri, non solum narralionis ipsius, sed etiam epistolarum praemissarum , graecam originem asserere. voluit, idque rectissime. Quamquam enim moderni quidam critici ob nonnullos hebraismos aut prioris aut alterius aut utriusque epistolae textum primigenium fuisse hebraicum suspicantur!, dubifari tamen vix potest, quin ambae, utpote Iudaeis aegypliacis destinalae, graeco sermone sint compositae, Iudaeos enim aegypltiacos ignorasse linguam hebraicam diserte testatur S. Iustinus M.; sed eius testimonio non indigemus, quoniam Philo, doctissimus Iudaeorum alexandrinorum, sua hebraicorum nominum interpretatione satis demonstrat, sibi linguam illam fuisse ignotam, et [udaei alexandrini, si hebraicas Scripturas intellexissent, graeca versione non indiguissent?. Inter ludaeos autem palaestinenses ea aetale non defuisse, qui graecam linguam callebant, et temporum ratio ipsa docct, quum in continuo commercio cum regibus Seleucidis et Plolemaeis essent, et eorum legationes ad Spartiatas et Romanos comprobant, et graeca vel graecata nomina multorum ludaeorum confirmant?. Pauci autem epistolarum hebraismi non magis hebraicam earum originem probant, quam similes dicendi modi libros N. T. hebraice esse conscriptos docent. Quod ad narrationem ipsam attinet, auctor asserit se opus lasonis Cyrenaei, qui certe graece conscripserat *, abbreviasse; nec tacuisset, si opus suum ex altera lingua. transtulisset. Ceterum non tantum prologus et epilogus, qui soli auctori debentur, sed ipsa quoque narratio stylo suo, uti recte monuit S. Hieronymus, graecam originem produnt.
Ut tempus, quo liber hie compositus est, definiamus, inter epistolas praemissas et inter auctoris historiam distinguamus oportet. Priori epistolae annus est adscriptus; data est a. 188. aer. Seleuc. i. e. 125. a. Chr.; nec ulla redditur probabilis ratio, cur illa temporis significatio erronea dicatur. Obiicientibus enim mirum videri, quod quadraginta. dumtaxat annis post templi purificationem Hellenistae ad encacnia celebranda sint invitati, iam antiquitus responsum est, in ipsa epistola priorem a. 153. datam commemorari, qua Aegyptii, qui aliquot annis antea (c. a. 160.) sibi templum suum heliopolitanum exstruxerant, monebantur, ne ierosolymitanum sanctuarium negligerent?. AIlleri epistolae annus quidam adscriptus non est, sed supra (151 p. 442) iam ostendimus eam datam esse intra a. 163. et 161., atque vix non est certum, eam ad primum a festi inslitutione diem anniversarium recurrentem ludeos aegyptiacos invitasse; scripta igitur est a. 162. a. Chr.
Duplex quoque est de narratione quaestio, «quando scilicet Iason Cyrenaeus quinque suoslibros de rebus machabaicis ediderit et quando epitomator ex eis compendium suum confecerit. De losone autem nihil prorsus nobis est traditum. Sola nominis similitudine nixi nonnulli lasonem Eleazari filium, «quem Iudas Machabaeus legatum Romam misit (1 .MaucA. 8,17), auctorem maioris operis fuisse suspicati sunt. Quae sententia incerta quidem semper manebit deficientibus historicis documentis; omni tamen probabilitate eam non carere facile fatebitur, quieunque duo haee perpenderit. lasonem. enim, ludae legatum, graecarum lilerarum nequaquam. fuisse ignarum ipsa eius legatio romana abunde demonstrat et. graecatum eius nomen confirmat. Lcgatum autem, ut legationis suae finem certius obtinerel , commentarios scripsisse de atrocissima persecutione, quam Antiochus Epiphanes contra Iudaeos excitaverat, et de rebus praeclare gestis, quibus fudas Machabaeus populum suum et civitatem sanctam liberaverat, satis est verisimile; Romanis enim, qui eo usque de ludaeis ludaeorumque rebus vix quidquam audiverant, Indaeorum. causam. apliore modo commendare non potuit *. Quidquid autem de hac sententia est, illud extra prudentem dubitationem videtur esse positum, lasonem Cyrenaeum brevi ante Iudae Machabaei mortem, ergo circa tempus istius legationis, opus suum absolvisse. Id enim non tantum ex eo eruitur, quod ludae mortem auetor non commemoravit, quamvis maior operis pars de eius rebus gestis agat, sed multo clarius ex eo, quod post alteram victoriam a Iuda de Nicanore relatam auctor asserat civitatem sanctam semper in ludaeorum potestate remansisse : atqui mortem ludae secula est « magna tribulatio in Israel, qualis non fuit ex die, qua non est visus propheta in Israel », atque Iudae successores, lonathan et Simon, saepius ex civitate sancta a Syris sunt expulsi. Ante annum 161. igitur lasonis Cyrenaei opus conscriptum est.
Porro epitomator quoque quis fuerit et quando opus suum compilaverit, ignoramus. Quoniam lerusalem saepius czr/as (5 39)45) et. arx davidica acropolis (4 &xooxoXu) sine ullo alio epitheto in libro nostro nominatur et tropographiae palaestinensis accurata scientia in integro opere sese prodit, epitomatorem fuisse ludaeum palaestinensem nonnulli coniecerunt?; incertissima autem est coniectura, siquidem definire non possumus, annon epitomator haec ex maiore lasonis opere hauserit '?. Minore incertitudine gaudet altera coniectura de tempore, quo liber noster est compilatus. Etenim prior epistola, quae totius operis est prooemium, alexandrinos quidem ludaeos, ut cum ierosolymitanis encaeniorum festum celebrent, invitat, sed nullum exhibet motivum, quo invitatio haec urgeatur; quare non inepte admittimus, una cum illa epistola nostrum librum Alexandrinis esse transmissum, quippe qui totus in eo sit, ut templum ierosolymitanum commendet atque festi eius rationem historicam explicet, ideoque etiam alteram epistolam, quoniam de eodem festo agat, compendio esse additam. Circa a. 121. igitur integrum nostrum opus absolutum esse arbitramur !!,
Martianay Comunent. in S. Hieronymi librum nominum hebr. I. 1. (M. 23,1569 sqq.) €t Gesenius Gesch. der hebr. Sprache p. 83 sq.
3. lason (— losua) multi appellabantur : legatus Iudae I. 8,17; Cyrenacus 1]. 2,24: suminus sacerdos II. 4,7 eic.; Menelaus summus sacerdos II. 4,23 eqq.; Aicimus summus sacerdos 1I. 14,3 etc.
$. Efficax graccae originis argumentum praebent multae paronomasiae : dyety dyáva 4,18; napaóty Ü:lz... ctac£/ 0v, 1,22 ; UxovoUcóaas UxovoUcuüc(e 4,26 ; Gt£taalele... bcidv 4,34; f«Xàv foXde 5,3; tórpsplav Gvoratplav 5,6; üzobevosas... bévne 5,9 elc., etc. Alia primitivae graecitatis exempla affert Grimm 1. c. p. 7.
7. Obiecerit nonnemo, pium illum animum, quem integer liber spirat, frequentia illa iudicia, quae de personis et rebus omnibus feruntur, diligentiam illam, qua Dei singularis providentia in populo suo adiuvando et in eius hostibus puniendis demon- Stratur atque omnes res gestae ad Deum et ad templum eius referuntur, uno verbo lotum t6 zpavpatixov libri vetare, ne illum cthnicís Romanis proxime destinatum dicamus. Quae verissime sunt dicta, sí de canonico nostro libro agitur; illum enim Iudaeis alexandrinis proximo fuisse destinatum ipsi iam diximus. At quaestio est dc lasonis Cyrenaei opere, ad cuius indolem et finem ex nostro compendio non valet illatio; nequo quidquam obstat, quominus religiosum illum pragmatismum integrum soli epitomatori deberi dicamus.
1536. — sSunminam csse. IHIsSTORICAM. AUCTORITATEM. d. Maca. hodie omnes concedunt!; quoeirea in. ea demonstranda immorari superfluum est, postquam saeculo praecedente PP. Er. lFrochlich. c Ios. Khell ita eam vindicaverunt, ut eorum responsa hodie quoque omnibus obiectionibus refutandis plane sufficiant?. Quoniam 1 Mach. tempore loannis Hyrcani est scriptus et spatium quadraginta dumtaxat annorum complectitur, eius auctor multarum rerum, quas narrat, testis coaevus fuit aliasque ex fontibus fide dignissimis facile haurire potuit. Eodem enim modo, quo IHyrcani res gestas annalibus publicis insertas esse asserit, trium priorum ducum praeclara facinora publica cum auctoritate esse literis mandata insinuat; si « ce/era verba bellorum ludac et virtutum et magnitudinis eius non esse descripta » propter eorum multitudinem monet ?, Praeterea liber noster non pauca continet documenta publica*, quae ex archivis publicis desumta esse patet. Illa quidem omnia vel saltem aliqua ab auctore arbitrario csse conficta, olim multi et hodie nonnulli coniecerunt protestantici interpretes; at sinceriores deuterocanonicorum librorum adversarii fatentur, nullius documenti &b auotore allati authentiam argumentis idoneis esse refutatam 5.
Unica fere, quae contra libri nostri auctoritatem hodie adhuc fieri solet, obiectio ea est, quod eius auctor « valde miram et curiosam (hochst native) ignorantiam historiae exterarum gentium prodat », quam tribus potissimum exemplis probare conantur *.
Cornelius a Lapide
Argument 101 paragraphs
I suppose these two books to be Canonical, as the Council of Trent defines, sess. IV; the Council of Carthage III, Can. 47; Innocent III, epist. 3, to Exuperius; Gelasius and others. Among the Hebrews they are not Canonical, both because they do not exist in Hebrew: whence they are unknown to the Hebrews; and because they were written after the Canon of the sacred books published by the Synagogue in the time of Ezra. See Bellarmine, lib. I, On the Word of God, cap. V; Sixtus Senensis, lib. VIII Biblioth., and Serarius here.
There exists moreover a third book of Maccabees, and among some a fourth; but the Church has not admitted these within the Canon. Wherefore these two are similar to the third and fourth books of Ezra.
The argument of the first and second books of Maccabees is to record the deeds and battles of Judas, Jonathan and Simon, brothers of the Maccabees, against Antiochus and other enemies. These two books therefore contain the history of the Synagogue, or of Israel and the people of God; for Ezra ends with Jeddoa or Jaddo the High Priest, who met Alexander the Great, from whom the first book of Maccabees begins, and continues the history of Israel through the successors of Alexander, namely the kings of Asia and the kings of Egypt, who now made covenants with the Jews, now waged cruel wars, in which the wonderful fortitude of the Maccabees shone forth, and the singular direction and protection of God giving them victory. By the way, however, and briefly, it touches upon the deeds of Alexander the Great and his successors down to Antiochus Epiphanes, who began to persecute the Jews and harass them with war: wherefore his and his successors' acts it narrates at length, namely those of Antiochus Eupator, who was the son of Epiphanes, of King Demetrius and Alexander, and of another Antiochus, who was the son of Demetrius, who waged wars with Judas, Jonathan and Simon Maccabees. It therefore comprises the deeds of about sixty years.
Who was the author is unknown. It is probable that he was one of the priests or High Priests; for to these was given the care of writing the history of their nation, as Josephus testifies, lib. II Against Apion. It is probable that the first book was written by John Hyrcanus, son of Simon, brother of Judas Maccabeus. For he succeeded his father Simon in the Principate equally as in the High Priesthood, and was present at almost all the deeds of his father and uncle; whence his illustrious mention is made at the end of book I. Add that he himself was also a Prophet, as Josephus asserts, lib. XIII, chapter X, whom hear: "Hyrcanus dies in the 31st year of his reign; honored by God with the three greatest dignities, the principate of the Jewish nation, and the High Priesthood, and prophecy. For he enjoyed divine converse; whence he obtained such foreknowledge of future things that he predicted that two of his elder sons would not long enjoy their father's principate." The same author asserts that he predicted the present victory of his sons fighting from afar. Finally, he presided over Israel for 31 years, and maintained peace with his neighbors, and therefore had leisure in abundance for writing these things. Thus Sanchez. He therefore wrote down the heroic battles and deeds of his grandfather Mattathias, father of Simon and uncle of Judas and Jonathan, as the heroic deeds of his family, and therefore ended at the death of his father Simon.
The history of the second book was written at length by Jason of Cyrene in five books, which he condensed into an epitome, and a chief priest made the second book, and this by command of the Synagogue. For in the name of the Synagogue the whole second book was written, as it were a letter to the Jews dispersed throughout Egypt, that he might comfort them, afflicted by the persecution of Antiochus and his successors, with the news of better things, as appears from its beginning: "To the brethren," it says, "who are throughout Egypt, the Jews send greeting, the brethren who are in Jerusalem." In these, however, was Judas, not Maccabeus, as Bellarmine and others wish: for he was already dead, but another, either a prophet, or a prince of the people and Senate, in whose name the letter was written, concerning whom more in lib. II, cap. I, 10 and cap. II, 24. Whence Serarius thinks this Judas to be the author of the letter, and calls him an Essene.
The first book of Maccabees existed in Hebrew in the time of St. Jerome, as he himself confesses in the Galeatine prologue. The second also existed in Hebrew, as Eusebius insinuates in the Chronicle at the year of the world 4800: "The history of the Maccabees," he says, "was found in Hebrew." Thus Sanchez.
Prolegomena to the Books of Maccabees
here he reckons the kingdom of the Greeks; but these books are not found among the divine Scriptures;" understand, among the Hebrews. And reason supports this. For it was written to the Jews scattered throughout Egypt: but the native and maternal language of the Jews was Hebrew, indeed many of them knew no other.
Moreover, the authors of the Greek edition of these books cannot be the Seventy Interpreters, because they flourished under Ptolemy Philadelphus, who preceded Antiochus Epiphanes by a hundred years, whose persecutions are described here.
You will ask first: Who and what sort were the Maccabees, and why were they so called? Josephus ben Gorion writes that Judas, the brother of Jonathan, was first called Maccabee from his strength, for his father Mattathias, when about to die, addressed him thus: "O my son Judas, who on account of your strength will be called Maccabee," namely from the root מחא macha, which signifies to extinguish, to kill, to destroy, so that Maccabee is the same as extinguisher and slayer of enemies. Thus Eusebius in book III of his History, chapter X, saying: "They entitled the book of the Maccabees because it contains therein the struggles and contests endured by the Maccabees for piety." This is supported by what Mattathias says when dying, chapter II, 66, exhorting all to the protection of the law and his nation and to war: "Let Judas Maccabee, strong in might from his youth, be your leader in war." Again Pagninus in the Hebrew names derives the name Maccabi (for thus he thinks it should be written) from מכהני maccabi, that is, a blow by me, for נכה nacha means to strike, to smite, to kill, so that Maccabi is the same as striker, slayer, which Judas Maccabee was, and his companions.
These two etymologies are set forth, so that it is scarcely doubtful that allusion is made to them. Others derive "Maccabee" from the Greek verb μαχοῦμαι, that is, I fight, as if you were to say fighter, athlete, contestant. Isidore of Pelusium in book III, epistle 4: "Maccabee," he says, "in the Persian language means lord." Furthermore, others derive Maccabee from כאב caab, that is, to grieve; whence in the Hiphil form מכאיב macib, that is, causing grief, tormenting the enemies of Israel. Others derive it from חבב chabab, that is, to love, as if Judas were called Maccabee from ardent love of God, that is, lover, or Amadeus. Others from מקבת mackeba, that is, hammer. For Judas was a hammer of the Gentiles.
But the Hebrews and Latins commonly hand down that Judas was called Maccabee because he himself had received as the watchword of the holy war against the followers of the infidel Antiochus that which Moses sang when Pharaoh was defeated, Exodus XV, 11, מי כמך באלים יהוה, mi camocha baelim Jehova, that is: "Who is like unto Thee among the strong, O Lord?" and therefore he inscribed the initial letters of these words on his standards for the sake of brevity, namely מכבי which, when supplied with vowel points and conflated into one word, make מכבי machabi, that is Maccabee, so that machabi is as it were the same as Michael, that is, who is like God; which name he then transmitted to his companions and successors. That this is so is evident from the subsequent deeds and battles of Judas, in which Judas always places all hope of victory in God alone, and therefore invoking Him, he rushed upon his enemies like a lion and prostrated them, and he did the same before his father's death from his youth, as his father himself asserts, chapter II, 66, where he constituted him leader of the war and people for this reason. Wherefore before his father's death his emblem was: Who is like unto Thee among the strong, O Lord? and from this by abbreviation he was called Machabi, that is, "Maccabee." For which reason he himself, about to engage with Nicanor, gave this watchword to his men, "God's help," as is evident in book II, chapter VIII, 23. Thus Genebrardus in the Chronicle, Sixtus Senensis, book I; Arias, on Isaiah chapter X; Baronius, in the Martyrology on the first day of August, Serarius, Salianus, Sanchez and others. By a similar abbreviation of writing was composed that: Mane Tekel Phares, of Daniel V. Similar abbreviations are found throughout in the books of the Rabbis, by which they signify the whole word by the first letter, all of which Mercerus collected together and explained.
You will ask secondly: From which tribe was Judas, and his other brothers and descendants the Maccabees? Some think they were from the tribe of Judah. For from this tribe Jacob had predicted that the scepter would not depart until Christ, Genesis XLIX, 10. Whence also in I Maccabees V, it is said: "And the men of Judah were magnified."
But I say they were from the tribe of Levi and the priestly line. For they themselves were high priests and at the same time princes of the people. That this is so is clearly evident in book I, chapter II, where Mattathias is called a priest descended from Joarib; and Joarib descended from Aaron and Levi, as is evident in book I, Paralipomenon XXIV, 7. Whence Mattathias calls Phinehas the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron, the father of himself and his own, in book I, chapter II, 54. To the place Genesis XLIX, 10, I have responded there: to the place of the Maccabees I will respond below. Furthermore, the Maccabees were called by another name Assamoneans from Assamonaeus, who was the grandfather or great-grandfather of Mattathias, as testified by Eusebius, Josephus, book XII of the Antiquities, chapter VIII and others. Hence the Hebrew Assamoneans is the same as Optimates or Princes. For such were the Maccabees.
Moreover Judas, Jonathan, Simon, and their successors the Maccabees were elected and constituted by the people as leaders or princes of the commonwealth, but not as kings, as is evident in book I, chapters IX and XIV. For the royal line of David failed in Jeconiah when he was led away into Babylon, who therefore is called by Jeremiah, chapter XXII, a man without children. "For neither," he says, "shall there be in his seed a man who shall sit upon the throne of David," that is, who shall be king; whence Salathiel the son of Jeconiah and Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel were leaders of the people, not kings.
You will say: Aristobulus, son of John Hyrcanus, received the diadem and the name of king; for, as Josephus says in the thirteenth book of Antiquities, chapter XIX: "When his father died, Aristobulus, being the eldest, wishing to turn the principate into the form of a kingdom, was the first to place the diadem upon himself after 481 years and three months, from which time the people, freed from the Babylonian captivity, had returned to their former seats by postliminium." I answer that Aristobulus and his successors usurped the name and crown of king by their own authority, and did not receive it given by the Republic; wherefore they were not true nor legitimate kings. Thus St. Jerome in chapter XXI of Ezekiel: "Hyrcanus," he says, "the High Priest placed the diadem upon his head, in vain did he wish to claim both this and that for himself, since the kingdom was not owed to him after Zedekiah," that is to say, because he was not of the stock of King David, which failed in the last king Zedekiah. By the common people, however, flattering him, and thence by some writers, he himself and his successors are called kings, yet in truth they were not kings. It is otherwise with Herod; for he received the kingdom of Judaea and the name of king from the Roman Senate and from Augustus, who was already ruling the Jews. Whence in him the scepter was transferred from Judah to a foreigner, and therefore then Christ came, to whom this scepter was owed, as Jacob prophesied, Genesis XLIX, 10.
Judas, Jonathan, and Simon Maccabaeus were synchronous and coeval with Antiochus the Great and his son Antiochus Epiphanes, and the son of the latter, Antiochus Eupator; for they waged wars with these two. Likewise Ptolemy Philometor, king of Egypt. Moreover, both Scipios, namely Africanus, who conquered Hannibal and overthrew Carthage; and Asiaticus, who triumphed over Antiochus the Great. Moreover, Fabius Maximus, the chastiser of Hannibal. Among the Philosophers, Posidonius and Panaetius. Among the Poets, Caecilius, Ennius, Naevius, Plautus. Furthermore, Antiochus the Great left two sons, Seleucus and Antiochus Epiphanes; the sons and grandsons of these two contended with one another in continuous succession and fought over the empire of Asia for two hundred years: thus God punished the impiety and crimes of Epiphanes in his descendants.
You will ask thirdly, what are the years of the Greeks, according to which all the deeds of the Maccabees are recorded in this book, and from whence they take their beginning. I answer that they begin from the thirteenth year after the death of Alexander the Great. For in the thirteenth year after Alexander, Seleucus, surnamed Nicator from many victories, having conquered Antigonus, king of Asia, made himself king of Asia, and thence the years of the Greeks, or of the Seleucids, began to be reckoned. Furthermore,
1. Seleucus, king of Asia, reigned for 30 years.
2. Seleucus was succeeded by his son Antiochus Soter, in whose time the Jews obtained a notable victory over the Galatians near Babylon, which is recorded in the second book of Maccabees, chapter VIII, verse 20. This Soter reigned for 19 years.
3. Soter was succeeded by his son Antiochus, surnamed θεός, that is God, thus called by the Milesians because he had expelled their tyrant Lymarchus, as Appian says in his Syrian history. Concerning him Daniel prophesied, chapter XI, verse 5. He lived during the first Punic War. He reigned for 15 years.
4. This Antiochus was succeeded by Seleucus Callinicus, concerning whom Daniel, chapter XI, verse 7. He reigned for 20 years.
5. Callinicus was succeeded by his son Seleucus Ceraunius, that is the Thunderbolt, because he appeared similar to lightning in audacity and swiftness, concerning whom Daniel, chapter XI, verse 10. He reigned for 3 years.
6. Ceraunius was succeeded by his brother Antiochus the Great, who was defeated by L. Scipio at Thermopylae and sent his younger son Antiochus Epiphanes to Rome as a hostage for himself, concerning whom Daniel, chapter X, verse 10 and following up to verse 20. He reigned for 37 years.
7. Antiochus the Great was succeeded by his elder son Seleucus Philopator, who at first, being summoned, submitted to the temple of the Jews, II Maccabees, chapter III, verse 3; but afterwards in verse 32, he wished to plunder it through Heliodorus, when he, having been scourged by an Angel and returning, killed Seleucus. This Seleucus reigned for 12 years.
8. The younger Antiochus, called Epiphanes, that is illustrious, succeeded his elder brother Seleucus. More truly he was named by some Epimanes, that is mad, because he cruelly and madly plundered the temple and harassed the Jews. He seized his brother's kingdom by deceit in the 137th year of the Greeks, in which same year he expelled the holy Pontiff Onias, and substituted in his place the impious brother Jason, II Maccabees IV, 7. In the second year of his reign he undertook his first expedition into Egypt, from which he entered Jerusalem peacefully. There in verse 21, in the 5th year, with Jason deposed, he appointed Menelaus the Benjamite as Pontiff, II Maccabees IV, 23, and cap. III, verse 4. In the sixth year, entering Egypt again, he was ordered by the Romans to depart. Wherefore, indignant, he departed, and poured out his indignation upon the neighbouring Jews, I Maccabees I, 21, and lib. II, cap. IV, verses 11 et seq., where I shall give the cause. Therefore in three days he killed 80,000 Jews, sold 84,000, and imprisoned as many, II Maccabees V, 14. Thence through Apollonius he killed many others, verse 24, and others through Philip, cap. VI, 11; he set up an idol of Jupiter in the temple, verse 2; then likewise he afflicted Eleazar with illustrious martyrdom, verse 18, and seven brothers, cap. VII, in the 9th year of his reign, which was the 145th year of the Greeks. Against him Mattathias raised himself and his own, lib. I, cap. II, and dying after a few months, his son Judas Maccabaeus succeeded him and made war against Antiochus, cap. III, who in the following year defeated and slew Apollonius, verse 11, and Seron, verse 23. In the 11th year of his reign, which was the 147th year of the Greeks, Antiochus went into Persia to plunder Elymais, but was put to flight by the Persians, cap. III, verse 37. Gorgias also, his general, was repulsed by the Jews, cap. IV. In the 12th year, Lysias likewise was overthrown by the Jews, and the temple, polluted by Antiochus through an idol, was purified. Ibid., verse 52, at the beginning of the 42nd year, which was the 149th year of the Greeks, returning from Persia, he died of grief, cap. VI, verse 16, having reigned for 12 years.
9. Antiochus Eupator, a nine-year-old boy, succeeded Antiochus Epiphanes, and he was killed along with his guardian Lysias by Demetrius, son of Seleucus Philopator, I Maccabees VII, 1, in the 151st year of the Greeks, which was the 593rd year of the founding of the city of Rome, in which same year L. Aemilius Paulus also died, who defeated Perseus, king of the Macedonians, and subjected Macedonia to the Romans. Eupator reigned for 2 years.
10. Demetrius, son of Seleucus, succeeded Eupator by force in the 151st year of the Greeks, until the 160th year, when he was killed by Alexander Balas, another son of Antiochus Epiphanes, and brother of Eupator. Therefore Demetrius reigned for 10 years. These things are evident from I Maccabees I, 7, and cap. X, verses 1 and 50. Moreover, Judas Maccabaeus in the second year of Demetrius was killed by his general Bacchides, and his brother Jonathan succeeded him publicly, I Maccabees IX, 13, 28 and 30.
11. Alexander Balas, son of Antiochus Epiphanes, began to reign in the 160th year of the Greeks, until the 167th year, when he was killed by Ptolemy Philometor, king of Egypt, his father-in-law, lib. I Maccabees cap. X, verses 1 and 67, and cap. XI, verse 17. Therefore Balas reigned for 6 years.
12. Demetrius, surnamed Nicator, son of Demetrius, son of Seleucus, began to reign in the 167th year of the Greeks until the 172nd year, when he was defeated and captured by Arsaces, king of Persia, I Maccabees cap. XI, verse 19, and cap. XIV, verses 1 and 3. He reigned for 6 years.
13. Antiochus, son of Alexander Balas, was promoted to the kingdom by his guardian Tryphon, and was killed by him after four years. He reigned from the 168th year of the Greeks until the 172nd year. Therefore his four years are not to be added in the chronology, because they are included in the years of Demetrius Nicator, with whom he reigned, I Maccabees XI, 39 and 54. So also Josephus, lib. XIII, cap. XII.
14. Tryphon, after killing his ward Antiochus and likewise Jonathan, brother of Judas Maccabaeus, by deceit seized the kingdom; but after three years he was killed by Antiochus Sidetes. I Maccabees cap. XIII, verses 12, 23 and 32, and cap. XII, at the end. Therefore he reigned for 3 years.
15. Antiochus Sidetes, surnamed Pius, brother of Demetrius Nicator, with his brother captured by Arsaces, king of the Persians, seized the kingdom after killing the usurper Tryphon, and made a treaty with Simon, brother of Jonathan, but broke it, I Maccabees XV, verses 1 and 27. He was killed, as profane histories relate, by his brother Demetrius returning from the Persians, because he had claimed for himself his wife Cleopatra along with the kingdom, but more truly by the priests of Nanea, II Maccabees I, 16. He reigned for 7 years.
16. Demetrius Nicator, brother of Sidetes, released by Arsaces, after his brother Sidetes was killed, recovered the kingdom, and held it again for 3 years.
17. Alexander Zebina, with the aid of Ptolemy Physcon, after Demetrius Nicator was killed, seized the kingdom. He reigned for 2 years.
18. Antiochus Gryphus, so called from the size of his nose, as Justin says in lib. XXXVIII and XXXIX, son of Demetrius Nicator and Cleopatra, after killing Zebina, seized the kingdom with the aid of his mother; but then, when his mother was preparing poison for him, he forced her to drink it herself under the guise of duty and kindness, and thus killed her. He reigned for 12 years.
19. Antiochus Cyzicenus, son of Antiochus Sidetes and Cleopatra (for she had married two brothers, namely Demetrius Nicator, and then, when he was captured by the Persians, his brother Sidetes), after killing his half-brother Antiochus Gryphe, whom he had previously deprived of the kingdom, survived him by only one year; yet altogether he reigned with him for 18 years.
20. Seleucus, son of Gryphe, with his brother Antiochus, after the death of their uncle Cyzicenus, obtains the kingdom: but defeated by Antiochus Eusebius, son of Cyzicenus, he is burned with the royal house. He reigned with his brother for 7 years.
21. Antiochus Eusebius, that is Pius, son of Cyzicenus, seizes the kingdom after killing Gryphe; but soon is deprived of it by Philippus and Demetrius, sons of Gryphe. Philippus and Demetrius therefore first reign together, then after Demetrius is defeated, Philippus alone rules. All of them together reigned for 6 years.
22. Tigranes, king of Armenia, while the aforementioned brothers were contending with each other for the kingdom, pretending he would aid them against Eusebius, invaded the kingdom, until he was expelled from it by Lucullus at the behest of the Romans. He held it for 14 years.
23. Antiochus Asiaticus (because he was educated in Asia Minor), son of Eusebius, while Lucullus was fighting with Tigranes and Mithridates, recovers his father's kingdom of Syria, and holds it with Lucullus's permission for 4 years. But soon Pompey takes it from him, and together with Judaea subjects it to the Romans, in the consulship of Cicero and Antony, in the year of the city 691.
The kingdom therefore of the Greeks in Syria, from the victory of King Seleucus, by which he defeated Antigonus, king of Asia Minor, and obtained the kingdom of all Asia, lasted altogether 248 years. Before the defeat of Antigonus, Seleucus had reigned, although not complete years, 13. But Alexander the Great, who first transferred the monarchy from the Persians to the Greeks by defeating Darius, from which time many reckon the years of the kingdom of the Greeks, lived 6 years after that very victory. The kingdom therefore of the Greeks in Syria from the beginning of the monarchy of Alexander the Great, until it was taken from them by Pompey and the Romans, lasted 267 years. During which, as I said, the descendants of the two brothers Seleucus and Antiochus Epiphanes continually contended for it, and successively all were each other's executioners. All the things already mentioned are evident from Appian, Justin, Josephus, Eusebius, Orosius and others.
Chronological Table of the Ptolemaic Kings of Egypt, Who After Alexander the Great, at the Same Time as the Seleucids in Syria, Reigned in Egypt.
1. Ptolemy Lagi immediately after Alexander occupied Egypt, and from him all his descendants were named Ptolemies, just as before they were called Pharaohs. He reigned for 40 years.
2. Ptolemy Philadelphus, son of Ptolemy Lagi, after his death reigned for 38 years. He released free 120,000 Jews, whom his father had brought captive into Egypt, and asked from and obtained from Eleazar the High Priest 72 Interpreters, who translated the Bible from Hebrew into the Greek language.
3. Ptolemy Evergetes, brother of Philadelphus, defeated Seleucus Callinicus and his son Ceraunus in battle. He reigned for 26 years.
4. Ptolemy, surnamed Philopator, that is lover of his father by antiphrasis, because he had killed his father, mother, brother, sister and wife, ensnared by the charms of Agathoclea the harlot, reigned for 17 years.
5. Ptolemy Epiphanes, son of Ptolemy Philopator, who married Cleopatra, daughter of Antiochus the Great and sister of Antiochus Epiphanes, from whom all the subsequent queens of Egypt were called Cleopatras, reigned for 23 years.
6. Ptolemy Philometor, elder son of Ptolemy Epiphanes, reigned for 35 years. During his reign, his uncle Antiochus Epiphanes entered Egypt, ostensibly to settle the dispute between him and his younger brother Ptolemy Physcon, but in reality with the intention of seizing the kingdom. Wherefore, when Philometor implored the aid of the Romans, he was ordered by them to have Antiochus leave Egypt; for which reason, gnashing his teeth, he vented his wrath upon the Jews, as we shall see in book II, chapter IV, and book I, chapter XII. Again, Philometor in the 18th year of his reign granted to Onias, who was the son of Onias the holy High Priest, to build a temple at Heliopolis in Egypt, similar to the one in Jerusalem, which was called Onion from him, and it stood for 233 years, finally destroyed together with the temple in Jerusalem by Titus and Vespasian. Thus Josephus, Eusebius and others. Finally Philometor, craftily wishing to deprive his son-in-law Alexander of the kingdom of Asia, died immediately in the year of the Greeks 167, I Maccabees XI, 1 and 18.
7. Ptolemy Physcon, or Evergetes, brother of Philometor, reigned after his brother for 29 years. He was a brother in a new prodigy, husband, and at the same time son-in-law of Cleopatra: for he married her daughter as his wife. Moreover, when Cleopatra, with Physcon her husband defeated, reigned alone, Physcon had both his own son and her son cut into pieces, and enclosed in a chest, and had it brought to her at the banquet on her birthday, as witness Justin in books XXXVIII and XXXIX.
8. Ptolemy Lathuri, son of Ptolemy Evergetes, surnamed by others Soter, reigned for 16 years.
9. Ptolemy Alexander, brother of Lathuri, with his mother, who had expelled Lathuri, reigned for 10 years.
10. Ptolemy Lathuri, restored to the kingdom because of his mother's cruelty, reigned again for another 8 years.
11. Ptolemy called Auletes, because he practiced the art of the aulos-player, son of Lathyrus, as Salianus says. He fathered Cleopatra, who was the last queen of Egypt. He together with his daughter Berenice ruled universally for 30 years.
12. Ptolemy Dionysius, son of Auletes, who as a boy ruled Egypt through his sister Cleopatra for 5 years.
13. Cleopatra, having overthrown her brother Ptolemy Dionysius, ruled alone for 17 years. She is that celebrated concubine of M. Antonius the triumvir, who was defeated and fell in battle by Augustus Caesar: Cleopatra, lest she fall into the hands of Augustus, killed herself by the bite of an asp. Augustus soon subjugated all of Egypt to himself and the Romans, and then he began to be monarch in the year of the city's founding 724, which was the third year of Olympiad 187.
All these things are handed down by Eusebius, Justinus, St. Epiphanius, Bede, Salianus, Torniellus and others. These will bring great light to both books of the Maccabees. For the kings Antiochus and Demetrius of Asia contended for a long time with the Ptolemy kings of Egypt over Judaea, indeed over empire: for Judaea lay between the two, and was therefore to both an apple of discord, so that each strove to arrogate it to himself.
Chronology of the Maccabees, or Assamoneans, Who Presided Over the People Not Only as Priests, But Also as Princes.
1. MATHATHIAS, rising up against Antiochus Epiphanes in the ninth year of Epiphanes, which was the year of the Greeks 145, held the Pontificate and Principate of Israel for a few months, I Maccabees II, 1.
2. Judas Maccabaeus, upon the death of Mathathias, as it were the firstborn son succeeded his father in the Pontificate and Principate: he most bravely and most successfully defended his country and the true worship of God; he purged the temple of the idol of Antiochus, in the year of the Greeks 146: finally slain fighting fiercely against Bacchides in the year of the Greeks 152, I Maccabees IX, 3 and 18. Therefore he ruled and defended Israel for 6 years.
3. Jonathan was substituted for his brother Judas by the people, afterwards approved by Alexander Bala, son of Antiochus Epiphanes, I Maccabees X, 5 and 20. Finally he was killed by treachery by Trypho in the year of the Greeks 170, I Maccabees XIII, 23 and 41, having presided for 19 years.
4. Simon was substituted for his brother Jonathan in the Dukedom and Pontificate, I Maccabees XIII, 8 and 25. He was killed by treachery by Ptolemy his son-in-law in the year of the Greeks 177, I Maccabees cap. ult., vers. ult., having governed for 7 years.
5. John Hyrcanus, son of Simon, presided as Duke and Pontiff for 31 years. Mention is made of him, I Maccabees cap. ult. vers. ult., and in him ends the sacred history of the Maccabees, and all of the Old Testament history, and Holy Scripture.
6. Aristobulus, son of John Hyrcanus. He was the first to assume the name and crown of king, which his successors assumed by his example. He killed his brother Antigonus, and in the same year, vomiting forth God's vengeance in blood, he died. He reigned 1 year.
7. Jannaeus, younger brother of Aristobulus, who, to please the Greeks, assumed a Greek name, and was called Alexander. He left two sons, Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, who contended with each other over the kingdom even unto Herod, and became his prey. He reigned for 27 years.
8. Alexandra, wife of Jannaeus, upon his death usurping the kingdom, reigned for 9 years.
9. Aristobulus the younger, son of Jannaeus, excluding his elder brother Hyrcanus, seized the Pontificate and kingdom; but captured by Pompey, he was sent to Rome with his two sons Antigonus and Alexander, having reigned for 3 years. Then Pompey took Jerusalem, and subjected all of Judaea to the Romans, and made it tributary, with Cicero and Antony as consuls.
10. Hyrcanus the elder, son of Jannaeus, is restored to the Pontificate by Pompey, and holds it, tossed about by various misfortunes, for 22 years.
11. Alexander, son of Aristobulus, escaping from Rome, attempted to seize Judaea; but after three years was captured by Gabinius, and was punished with death by Pompey: his father Aristobulus himself also, with his other son Antigonus, fleeing from Rome, with the aid of the Parthians seized Judaea and the Pontificate for three and a half years. But Julius Caesar adjudged the Pontificate to Hyrcanus, as Pompey had done before, and committed the guardianship of Judaea and Hyrcanus to Antipater the Idumean, as it were to a procurator: then M. Antony constituted Herod and Phasaelus, sons of Antipater, as tetrarchs. Finally Antigonus, the last of the Maccabees, at the request of Herod, was beheaded after 4 years.
In Antigonus ended the entire line of the Assamoneans, as well as their kingdom and Pontificate, since they held both for 126 years, as Josephus wishes, or rather for 130 years, as Salianus and others wish. For so many years flowed from the ninth year of Antiochus Epiphanes until the first year of Herod, in which he himself, having slain Antigonus, occupied the kingdom by full right, and in him the scepter of Judah failed, and therefore Christ came according to the oracle of Jacob, Genesis cap. XLIX, vers. 10. All these things are evident from Josephus, Eusebius, Salianus, Torniellus, Pererius and others.
Series of Pontiffs from Alexander the Great until Christ.
1. Jaddo. He met Alexander the Great here, and reconciled him when he was hostile to the Jews, as testified by Josephus, book XI and XIII, toward the end. According to Eusebius he presided for 17 years. Jaddo's younger brother was Manasses, who went to the temple similar to the one in Jerusalem, built by his father-in-law Sanballat on Mount Garizim, and was its High Priest, concerning whom there was perpetual strife and contention between the Jews and Samaritans until Christ, as is evident from John chapter IV. See Josephus, book XI, chapter VII.
2. Onias the First, son of Jaddo, to whom some give 23 years.
3. Simon, son of Onias, surnamed the Just, whose praises are described in Ecclesiasticus 50, 1.
4. Eleazar, brother of Simon, who sent the 72 Interpreters to Ptolemy Philadelphus, so that the Old Testament might be translated from Hebrew into Greek.
5. Manasses, son of Onias the First, brother of Simon, and uncle of Eleazar.
6. Onias the Second, son of Simon the Just, surnamed the Avaricious.
7. Simon the Second, son of Onias the Second.
8. Onias the Third, surnamed the Holy, son of Simon the Second, who by praying for Heliodorus, who was scourged by Angels, obtained his life for him, II Maccabees chapter III, and I Maccabees XII, 7 and 8. His son, also called Onias, built a temple in Heliopolis in Egypt under Ptolemy Philometor, which was called Onion after him.
9. Jesus, or Jason, brother of Onias the Holy, who, excluding his brother, purchased the High Priesthood from Antiochus Epiphanes, II Maccabees IV, 7, and V, 5.
10. Menelaus, Onias, brother of Simon the Benjaminite, purchasing the High Priesthood from the same Epiphanes, deposed Jason, just as Jason had deposed Onias the Holy; but since he could not provide the money promised to Epiphanes, Lysimachus his brother was appointed in his place, II Maccabees IV, 27. Soon, after Lysimachus was stoned, Menelaus again purchased the High Priesthood with new money. Ibid. last verse. These therefore were usurpers and false High Priests.
11. Mattathias, father of Judas Maccabaeus: concerning whom and his sons I have already spoken. Wherefore I shall briefly review only them, so that I may complete the series of High Priests.
12. Judas Maccabaeus.
13. Jonathan, brother of Judas.
14. Simon, brother of Jonathan.
15. John Hyrcanus, son of Simon.
16. Aristobulus, son of Hyrcanus.
17. Jannaeus Alexander, brother of Aristobulus.
18. Aristobulus, younger son of Jannaeus.
19. Hyrcanus, elder son of Jannaeus.
20. Antigonus, son of Aristobulus, in whom the line of the Hasmoneans ended.
21. Ananelus, appointed High Priest by Herod.
22. Aristobulus.
23. Ananelus a second time.
24. Simon Phabeti.
25. Simon Boethus, father-in-law of Herod, at the end of whose life Christ was born, the new High Priest of the new Testament according to the order of Melchizedek, Hebrews VII.
From what has been said, gather that from the death of Alexander the Great until the years of the Greeks, or until the beginning of the reign of Seleucus in Asia, there elapsed 12 years; thence until the Maccabees 145 years; finally from the Maccabees until the birth of Christ 165 years. The death of Alexander therefore preceded the birth of Christ by 322 years. See the Chronological table, which I prefixed to the Pentateuch.
The Order and Connection of the Books of the Maccabees.
Moses in Genesis described the origin of the world and the Church of God, then its propagation until the kings of Israel Saul and David is narrated in the book of Joshua and Judges. Next in the book of Kings its progress is recounted, which it had under the kings, namely Saul, David, Solomon, etc., likewise what it suffered from the kings of the Assyrians and Chaldeans, whose was the first monarchy. Then in Ezra, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther are commemorated those things which befell the same Church, namely Israel and the people of God, both prosperous and adverse, in the second monarchy, which was that of Cyrus and the kings of the Persians. Now in these books of the Maccabees are narrated those things which befell the same people, both advantageous and disadvantageous, in the third monarchy, which was that of Alexander the Great and the Greeks, namely from the Antiochuses, kings of Asia and Syria, and the Ptolemies, kings of Egypt: for between both Judaea always wavered in the middle, now friendly to these, now to those, or an enemy.
Moreover, four books of the Maccabees are found, and their order is as follows in history and chronology. In the first place according to the order of times and deeds should be placed the third book of the Maccabees, because it recounts those things which befell Israel and the people of God under Ptolemy Philopator, king of Egypt, and Antiochus the Great, king of Asia. In the second place should be placed that which is now placed second in the Bibles, because it comprises the deeds and wars of Judas Maccabaeus with Antiochus Epiphanes, who was the son of Antiochus the Great. The third place is demanded by that which in the Bibles is the first of the Maccabees, because to the acts of Judas it adds the deeds of Jonathan and Simon, his brothers and successors. The fourth place is claimed by the fourth book, because it records the deeds of John Hyrcanus, who was the son of Simon, brother of Judas. But among these four, only the two middle ones are canonical; the other two, namely the first and the last, are ambiguous, that is, of obscure and uncertain authorship, yet not false or condemned; such likewise are the third and fourth books of Ezra.
Again, the first book of Maccabees which exists in the Bibles, as if canonical, differs greatly from the second, and was written by another author: for it has the flavor of Hebrew phraseology, whereas the second has Greek. Again, the first records its events by the years of the Greeks, numbering them according to the Alexandrian reckoning; the second, however, according to the Chaldean reckoning, which differs from the Alexandrian by a full year and a half, as I shall show in its place. Finally, the second book narrates the deeds of Judas in a different manner than they are narrated in the first book, and never mentions the first book. Finally, the first adds to the deeds of Judas the deeds of Jonathan and Simon, which the second omits.
Machine translation from the Latin, not reviewed.