and those which mention the persecutions of the son or friend of God, xviii. 13. (i. e. the Jewish people,) appear to indicate the age of Antiochus Epiphanes.-Those who have brought down the date of the book to some time after Christ, have advanced no arguments which merit refutation.The conjecture that it has been interpolated by Christia -funded almost entirely upon doctrinal grounds, on the mere assumption that such doctrines as it contains were not to be expected from a Jew.

There are some persons who consider the second part (c. x-xix.) as a separate work, and suppose it to have been written by a different author, or else by the same in the earlier part of his life. [b] But they have not been able to establish their opinion by solid arguments, nor have they noticed the connexion between the ninth and tenth chapters. The difference of style which is urged may be traced to the nature of the subject, which is different in the second part from that of the first.[c] It is not true, as has been supposed, that Solomon does not speak in the second part, for if no express assertion to that effect occurs, it ought to be considered that neither is there any such assertion in the first part, except in c. ix. 7, 8, 12.—Lastly, the argument founded on the difference of ideas and doctrines in the two parts, to which much importance has been attached, is too far-fetched, and is refuted by the fact, that very many of these ideas and doctrines do occur in both parts. For instance, that remarkable appellation "the son of GOD," applied to his people in xviii. 13., (Eπ TW TWV πρωτοτοκων ολεθρῳ ωμολόγησαν Θε8 υιον λαον είναι,) has a manifest reference to the son of GoD' mentioned in ii. 18., viz. the man that honours him, of whom it is said, that he will be persecuted even to death. See Germ. Introd. p. 944-947.

If the contents of the book had been produced by assemblies of the learned, which Nachtigal thinks he discovers every where, the character and style of its language would have varied more; not to say, that these assemblies are altogether fictitious.

[a) Comp. 214. notes. Tr.]

[b) HOUBIGANT, Proleg. in Sac. Script. P. II. makes c. x. begin a book distinct from the preceding part.-EICHHORN, S. 144. ff. makes c. xi. 2. the commencement of a separate work. BRETSCHNEIDER concludes the first part with the end of c. xi. DE WETTE, Einl. § 313, and BER

THOLDT, Th. V. S. 2259. ff. agree with Jahn, and refute these various hypotheses.- -BretschneideR, Diss. de libri Sapientiæ parte priore c. i-xi. e duobus libellis diversis conflata, Viteb. 1804, and ENGELBRECHT, Librum Sapientia Salomonis vulgo inscriptum interpretandi specimen I. et II. Hafnia, 1816, even subdivide the first part at vi. 8, considering this as a separate work. See DE WETTE, ubi supra, anm. c.) Tr.]

(c) Besides, DE WETTE shows, § 313, anm. d) that there is no real difference between the styles of the two parts. Tr.]

§ 255. Versions of the Book of Wisdom.

The Latin Vulgate version is of higher antiquity than Jerome. It expresses the Greek text word for word, and is therefore occasionally unintelligible.The Arabic version in the London Polyglot is of an unknown age, and it also follows the Greek text closely.The Syriac version in the same Polyglot exhibits the Greek text in the beginning with accuracy, but afterwards it becomes more negligent. The readings of this version which Faber has adduced to prove that it was made from a Chaldee text, are in part errors of transcribers and of the press, in part paraphrastic renderings, and in part susceptible of better explanations on the supposition of their being translations from the Greek.

CHAPTER VIII.

OF THE FIRST TWO BOOKS OF THE MACCABEES.

§ 256. Of the name Maccabees.

It is very evident from I Mac. ii. 4., that the sons of Mattathias had each his own proper surname, and that Judas alone was called Maccabeus, paxxa Banos. Afterwards this appellation was extended ó to all who in the second century before Christ contended for their religion and country, and thus the title of these and certain other books originated.—The name was formerly supposed to have been

who מי כמוך באלים יהוה formed from the initial letters of the words

is like unto thee among the gods, O Jehovah, or '

." T

', who

is like God among the gods, which were thought to have been embroidered on the standards of the Jews during their wars with the Syrians, and to have been contracted into one word ' or . But if this were the origin of the term, it should have been written μαχαβαιοι, whereas it is constantly written μακκαβαιοι, as if derived a hammer, a hammerer, a surname given to Judas, as

מקנה from

מקבי

formerly to Charles Martel, in consequence of his heroic actions.

In Arabic also the word signifies not only to perforate a wall,

but also to be prince or chief of the people, and hence

a prince of the people. This is the way in which the term was explained by Isidore of Pelusium, who compared the word saxxa Banos

with the Persian xoigavos, which in an unpublished Etymologicon is explained by decorns, master. The same thing is expressed by the Hebrew or Chaldee title of the book, as cited by Origen in EUSEBIUS, Hist. Eccles. VI. 25., dagßar ragßeve, na, history of the prince of the sons (or worshippers) of God; where paxxaßuos is made equivalent to prince.[a]

-;

The Maccabees are called also by JOSEPHUS, Ant. XII. vi. 1., Asmonæans, or Hasmonœans, a term which most probably has its origin in the family name Asmon or Hashmon, jipon.[6] But some derive it from

Dun, because among the Arabians

6

حشيم

means a man of much

service; [c] this however seems to be very far-fetched.

[a) Comp. MICHAELIS, Or. Bibl. Th. XII. S. 112., and DE WETTE, Einleit. § 299. anm. c).- -For the various opinions which have been maintained respecting the origin of the name, see LEYDECKER de Republica Hebræorum, Lib. VIII. Cap. I. p. 580. Amstel. 1710, and DRUSIL explicatio tituli, prefixed to his Notes on the first book of Maccabees in the Critici Sacri, Tom. V. p. 50.- -That the application of the epithet "the hammerer," to a conquering ruler, would not be incongruous with Oriental, and especially with Hebrew usage, is proved by Jer. 1. 23., where is similarly applied. Comp. also Jer. li. 20. Tr.]

[b) So JOSEPHUS BEN GORION calls them linen 13, and `]2 , p. 66, 159, 443. ed. BREITHAUPT. Tr.]

[c) So EICHHORN, S. 217, referring to the use of ¡n in Ps. lxviii, 32. Tr.]

§ 257.

Contents of the First Book of Maccabees.

Antiochus Epiphanes, who had seized the kingdom of Syria in the year 137 of the era of the Greeks, or of contracts, (175 B. C.), in the year 143 of the same era (169 B. C.) returning from his second expedition into Egypt, plundered Jerusalem, slew many of the Jews, made many of them prisoners, and spoiled and profaned their temple. Purposing acts of still greater atrocity, in the 145th year of the era of contracts (B. C. 167), upon his return from his fourth expedition into Egypt, he issued orders to put to death all the citizens of Jeru

salem, to raze the walls, and to fortify the castle of Zion; he even proceeded to such extremities as to command all the inhabitants of his kingdom to embrace his own religion. Officers appointed by the king were despatched to Judea, in order to force the Jews to worship idols; and to punish with death all who should refuse. One of these officers having gone to the city Modein, was resisted by Mattathias, a priest of the twenty-fourth course, which derived its name from Joiarib. This courageous man, with his five sons, assembled the Jews who persevered in the religion of their ancestors, and marching through the country put to death not only the Jewish apostates but also the royal officers, and called upon his countrymen to repel force by force. Upon his death, which took place in the year of the era of contracts 146 (B. C. 166), his son Judas Maccabæus was appointed conductor of the war, c. i. ii., and, with his few companions, destroyed immense armies of the Syrians. He was slain in battle in the year of the era of contracts 152 (B. C. 160), iii. 1— viii. 27., and the Jews substituted in his place his brother Jonathan, who discharged the duties of his office fourteen years, and at length fell a victim to the perfidy of the enemy in the year 170 of the same era (B. C. 142), viii. 28—xii. 53. He was succeeded by the eldest son of Mattathias, Simon, who shortly after received from the people the dignity of prince, and that of high priest by hereditary right. After he had conducted the affairs of the nation with great ability, he was treacherously slain by his son-in-law Ptolemy in the seventh year of his government, in the year of the era of contracts 177 (B. C. 135), c. xiii.-xvi.[a]

"partly

(a) DE WETTE, Einleit. § 299, characterizes this history as unsatisfactory on account of its brevity, faulty, (i. 6. viii. 7.) uncritical, (xii.) and tending to exaggeration, but yet on the whole very deserving of credit, sufficiently attentive to chronological accuracy, and superior to the other historical productions of its age." Tr.]

§ 258.

Date of the First Book of Maccabees.

In I Mac. xvi. 23. the acts of John Hyrcanus, who succeeded his father Simon, are said to have been inserted in the annals or chronicles of his priesthood. From this declaration it is with reason inferred,