with the Persian xoigavos, which in an unpublished Etymologicon is explained by doors, master.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 dagßeve E,, history

of the prince of the sons (or worshippers) of God; where paxxa Bas 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, ¡inen.[6] But some derive it from

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 DRUSII 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.]

גני and בני חשמוני So JOSEPHUS BEN GoRION calls them (6]

'xn, p. 66, 159, 443. ed. BREITHAUPT. Tr.]

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

T:

§ 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]

[a) DE WETTE, Einleit. § 299, characterizes this history as "partly 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,

that the work in question was written either during the last years of that prince, or after his death, which took place in the year 106 B. C. The inconsiderable knowledge which it displays of the Romans, (in c. viii.), is at variance with a more modern date; for in the century immediately preceding the birth of Christ, the Jews were much better acquainted with that nation. The author has left no vestige of himself. It is evident, however, from the declaration already mentioned relating to the actions of John Hyrcanus, and from the remark made in ix. 21. (22.) in reference to those of Judas, (which, it is said, were not all written,) that he had drawn from annals contemporaneous with the events. The contents themselves present sufficient evidence that the author made an unexceptionable use of his authorities.

§ 259. Language of the First Book of Maccabees.

JEROME (Prolog. Galeat.) asserts that he found the first book of Maccabees in the Hebrew language, and Origen gives us, (as before stated, § 256.) the Hebrew or Chaldee title of the book. To this evidence for the Hebrew origin of the work it may be added, that the Greek text not only abounds with Hebraisms, but exhibits also some erroneous translations and various readings, which betray their origin from a Hebrew text. Compare vi. 1., Eλupais av en egoidi Toλs, where wong arises from the equivocal character of the word , which in Chaldee means a province, and in Syriac a city, in which last meaning the translator has improperly understood it; also xiv. 5., where the original Hebrew word "s, which ought to have been rendered coasts, is explained by ταις νήσοις θαλασσης. the islands of the sea. Very harsh Hebraisms occur also in i. 16. ii. 19, 42. iv. 19. v. 40, 53, 64. See Germ. Introd. p. 955, 956. [a]

T.:

[a) See also DE WETTE, Einleit. § 300, who agrees with Jahn, and gives additional examples of Hebraisms and mistakes of the Greek translator. Tr.]

§ 260.

Versions of the First Book of Maccabees.

The age of the Greek version of this book is unknown. But a work, the contents of which were so interesting to all the Jews, was no doubt soon translated into that language in which it could be read

by Hellenists. It is therefore in the highest degree probable, that this version was made before the commencement of the century immediately preceding the birth of Christ.The Vulgate version was made before the time of Jerome, and from a Greek text.That the Syriac was translated immediately from the Hebrew is maintained with a multiplicity of arguments by JOHN DAVID MICHAELIS in his notes added to his German version of this book; but TRENDELENBURG, in EICHHORN's Repertorium für Biblisch. und Morgen. Lit. xv. Th. S. 58. ff. has advanced some considerations against his hypothesis which are not to be disregarded. A more critical examination therefore is still necessary in order to settle this question.[a]

[a) EICHHORN, Allgem. deutsch. Bibl. Th. LI. S. 14. ff., and DE WETTE, 301, consider it as made from the Greek. Tr.]

§ 261. Contents of the Second Book of Maccabees.

The second book of Maccabees consists of three parts, which have no connexion with each other. 1) Chap. i. to the middle of the 10th verse contains a letter, addressed by the people of Jerusalem and of Judea to the Egyptian Hellenists, written in the year B. C. 123. and of the era of contracts 188. After mentioning a previous letter which had been sent, in the year 169 of the era of contracts (B. C. 143), relating to the calamities that had been undergone, it informs the Jews in Egypt that now the sacrifices had been restored and the feast of dedication was kept, and urges upon them the celebration of the same religious festival.- -2) From the middle of the tenth verse of the first chapter to the eighteenth of the second is contained another more ancient letter of the inhabitants of Judea, the elders, and Judas Maccabeus, to the priest Aristobulus, the instructer of king Ptolemy, and to the Egyptian Jews. From the mention of Judas Maccabeus, it is clear that this letter was written between the years of the era of contracts 149 and 153 (B. C. 163–159). It contains an account of the dangers with which the writers had been threatened by Antiochus Epiphanes, and of his death, and admonishes the Jews of Egypt to celebrate the feast of dedication and of the consecrated fire on the 25th of the month Casleu. Of this consecrated fire, and also of the ark of the covenant, the holy tabernacle, and the golden altar of in

cense, some extraordinary things are related.3) Then follows in ii. 19-32, a preface to the book, in which the author signifies his intention of reducing the five books of Jason into an epitome. He relates some more ancient transactions which prepared the way for the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, c. iii-v. At last he recounts the exploits of Judas Maccabeus, and concludes the book with the defeat and slaughter of Nicanor, of which an account is also given in I Mac. vii.

The two books of Maccabees ought to be constantly compared together, as they serve for mutual illustration; and therefore in my German Archæology, II. Th. I. B. § 93–103. S. 402–476., I have given the corresponding places. The differences in the chronology of the books may be reconciled by reference to the different methods of commencing the year, the first book following that of the Babylonians, and reckoning from April, 311 B. C., while the second begins with October, 312 B. C. The objections which have been urged against this method of computing in these books, are answered in a work, which bears the title: Auctoritas utriusque libri Maccabæorum, Vienna Austria, 1749, p. 129–146:

262. Difficulties in the Second Book of Maccabees.

Although this work supplies some deficiencies in the history in the first book of Maccabees, yet it labours under difficulties by no means inconsiderable.1) The letters prefixed to the book are in some respects repugnant to its contents. For instance, the second letter states that Antiochus Epiphanes was stoned and his body cut in pieces by the priests, in the temple of Nanæa in Persepolis; but in c. ix. it is related, that this monarch was thrown out of his chariot as he was returning from Persia, attacked by a disease, and that his flesh putrified while he was yet alive. The other circumstances mentioned in this second letter, relating to the deportation of the Jews, i. 19., to the consecrated fire, i. 19–22. ii. 1, 4—8., and to the tabernacle of Moses, the golden altar of incense, and the ark of the covenant, ii. 4—8., are at variance with the history contained in other parts of the Bible. These letters do not appear to have been prefixed by the author, who could not so plainly contradict himself; they must have been added by some other person, like the epistle at the end of the book of Baruch. If it should be urged, that the words ra ds at the