[1] This serves to separate the macaws from the long-tailed parakeets
of the New World (_Conurus_), to which they are very nearly allied.
[2] There is some reason to think that Jamaica may have formerly
possessed a macaw (though no example is known to exist), and if so it
was most likely a peculiar species. Sloane (_Voyage_, ii. 297), after
describing what he calls the "great maccaw" (_A. ararauna_), which he
had seen in captivity in that island, mentions the "small maccaw" as
being very common in the woods there, and P. H. Gosse (_Birds of
Jamaica_, p. 260) gives, on the authority of Robinson, a local
naturalist of the last century, the description of a bird which
cannot be reconciled with any species now known, though it must have
evidently been allied to the Cuban _A. tricolor_.
MACBETH, king of Scotland (d. 1058), was the son of Findlaech, _mormaer_
or hereditary ruler of Moreb (Moray and Ross), who had been murdered by
his nephews in 1020. He probably became mormaer on the death of Malcolm,
one of the murderers, in 1029, and he may have been one of the chiefs
(the Maclbaethe of the _Saxon Chronicle_) who submitted to Canute in
1031. Marianus records that in 1040 Duncan, the grandson and successor
of Malcolm king of Scotland, was slain by Macbeth. Duncan had shortly
before suffered a severe defeat at the hands of Thorfinn, the Norwegian
earl of Orkney and Caithness, and it was perhaps this event which
tempted Macbeth to seize the throne. As far as is known he had no claim
to the crown except through his wife Gruach, who appears to have been a
member of the royal family. Macbeth was apparently a generous benefactor
to the Church, and is said to have made a pilgrimage to Rome in 1050.
According to S. Berchan his reign was a time of prosperity for Scotland.
The records of the period, however, are extremely meagre, and much
obscurity prevails, especially as to his relations with the powerful
earl Thorfinn. More than one attempt was made by members of the Scottish
royal family to recover the throne; in 1045 by Crinan, the lay abbot of
Dunkeld, son-in-law of Malcolm II., and in 1054 by Duncan's son Malcolm
with the assistance of Siward the powerful earl of Northumbria, himself
a connexion of the ousted dynasty. Three years later in 1057 Malcolm and
Siward again invaded Scotland and the campaign ended with the defeat and
death of Macbeth, who was slain at Lumphanan. Macbeth is, of course,
chiefly famous as the central figure of Shakespeare's great tragedy.
See W. F. Skene, _Chronicles of the Picts and Scots_ (1867) and
_Celtic Scotland_ (1876); Sir John Rhys, _Celtic Britain_ (1904).
MACCABEES, the name (in the plural) of a distinguished Jewish family
dominant in Jerusalem in the 2nd century B.C. According to 1 Macc. ii.
4, the name Maccabaeus (Gr. [Greek: Makkabaios]-? Heb. [Hebrew: makabi])
was originally the distinctive surname of Judas, third son of the Jewish
priest Mattathias, who struck the first blow for religious liberty
during the persecution under Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes). Subsequently,
however, it obtained a wider significance, having been applied first to
the kinsmen of Judas, then to his adherents, and ultimately to all
champions of religion in the Greek period. Thus the mother of the seven
brethren, whose martyrdom is related in 2 Macc. vi., vii., is called by
early Christian writers "the mother of the Maccabees." The name is used
still more loosely in the titles of the so-called Third, Fourth and
Fifth Books of Maccabees. It is now customary to apply it only to the
sons and descendants of Mattathias. As, however, according to Josephus
(_Ant._ xii. 6. 1), this brave priest's great-great-grandfather was
called _Hasmon_ (i.e. "rich" = magnate; cf. Ps. lxviii. 31 [32]), the
family is more correctly designated by the name of Hasmonaeans or
Asmoneans (q.v.). This name Jewish authors naturally prefer to that of
Maccabees; they also style 1 and 2 Macc. "Books of the Hasmonaeans."
If Maccabee (_maqqabi_) is the original form of the name, the most
probable derivation is from the Aramaic _maqqaba_ (Heb. [Hebrew:
makevet], Judg. iv. 21, &c.) = "hammer." The surname "hammerer" might
have been applied to Judas either as a distinctive title pure and simple
or symbolically as in the parallel case of Edward I., "Scotorum
_malleus_." Even if _maqqaba_ does denote the ordinary workman's hammer,
and not the great smith's hammer which would more fitly symbolize the
impetuosity of Judas, this is not a fatal objection. The doubled _k_ of
the Greek form is decisive against (1) the theory that the name Maccabee
was made up of the initials of the opening words of Exod. xv. ii; (2)
the derivation from [Hebrew: machvi] = "extinguisher" (cf. Isa. xliii.
17), based by Curtiss (_The Name Machabee_, Leipzig, 1876) on the Latin
spelling Machabaeus = [Greek: Makkabaios], which Jerome probably adopted
in accordance with the usage of the times.
The Maccabaean revolt was caused by the attempt of Antiochus IV.
(Epiphanes), king of Syria (175-164 B. C.), to force Hellenism upon
Judaea (see SELEUCID DYNASTY; HELLENISM). Ever since the campaigns of
Alexander the Great, Greek habits and ideas had been widely adopted in
Palestine. Over the higher classes especially Hellenism had cast its
spell. This called forth the organized opposition of the Hasidim (= "the
pious"), who constituted themselves champions of the Law. Joshua, who
headed the Hellenistic faction, graecized his name into Jason, contrived
to have the high-priesthood taken from his brother Onias III., and
conferred upon himself, and set up a gymnasium hard by the Temple. After
three years' tenure of office Jason was supplanted by the Benjamite
Menelaus, who disowned Judaism entirely. Antiochus punished an outburst
of strife between the rivals by plundering the Temple and slaying many
of the inhabitants (170 B. C.). Two years later Jerusalem was devastated
by his general Apollonius, and a Syrian garrison occupied the citadel
(Akra). The Jews were ordered under pain of death to substitute for
their own observances the Pagan rites prescribed for the empire
generally. In December 168 sacrifice was offered to Zeus upon an idol
altar ("the abomination of desolation," Dan. x. 27) erected over the
great altar of burnt-offering. But Antiochus had miscalculated, and by
his extreme measures unwittingly saved Judaism from its internal foes.
Many hellenizers rallied round those who were minded to die rather than
abjure their religion. The issue of an important edict ordaining the
erection of heathen altars in every township of Palestine, and the
appointment of officers to deal with recusants, brought matters to a
crisis. At Modin, Mattathias, an aged priest, not only refused to offer
the first sacrifice, but slew an apostate Jew who was about to step into
the breach. He also killed the king's commissioner and pulled down the
altar. Having thus given the signal for rebellion, he then with his five
sons took to the mountains. In view of the ruthless slaughter of a
thousand sabbatarians in the wilderness, Mattathias and his friends
decided to resist attack even on the sabbath. Many, including the
Hasidim, thereupon flocked to his standard, and set themselves to revive
Jewish rites and to uproot Paganism from the land. In 166 Mattathias
died, after charging his sons to give their lives for their ancestral
faith, and nominating Judas Maccabaeus as their leader in the holy
campaign.
The military genius of Judas made this the most stirring chapter in
Israelitish history. In quick succession he overthrew the Syrian
generals Apollonius, Seron and Gorgias, and after the regent Lysias had
shared the same fate at his hands he restored the Temple worship (165).
These exploits dismayed his opponents and kindled the enthusiasm of his
friends. When, however, Lysias returned in force to renew the contest,
Judas had to fall back upon the Temple mount, and escaped defeat only
because the Syrian leader was obliged to hasten back to Antioch in order
to prevent a rival from seizing the regency. Under these circumstances
Lysias unexpectedly guaranteed to the Jews their religious freedom
(162). But though they had thus gained their end, the struggle did not
cease; it merely assumed a new phase. The Hasidim indeed were satisfied,
and declined to fight longer, but the Maccabees determined not to desist
until their nation was politically as well as religiously free. In 161
Judas defeated Nicanor at Adasa, but within a few weeks thereafter, in a
heroic struggle against superior numbers under Bacchides at Elasa, he
was himself cut off. Even this, however, did not prove fatal to the
cause which Judas had espoused. If in his brother Jonathan it did not
possess so brilliant a soldier, it had in him an astute diplomatist who
knew how to exploit the internal troubles of Syria. In the contest
between Demetrius I. and Alexander Balas for the throne, Jonathan
supported the latter, who in 153 nominated him high priest, and
conferred on him the order of "King's Friend," besides other honours.
After the accession of Demetrius II. (145) Jonathan contrived to win his
favour, and helped him to crush a rebellion in Antioch on condition that
the Syrian garrisons should be withdrawn from Judaea. When, however,
Demetrius failed to keep his word, Jonathan transferred his allegiance
to Antiochus VI., whom Tryphon had crowned as king. After subjugating
the territory between Jerusalem and Damascus, he routed the generals of
Demetrius on the plain of Hazor. But as the Maccabees had now in the
name of the Syrians cleared the Syrians out of Palestine, Tryphon's
jealousy was aroused, and he resolved to be rid of Jonathan, who, with
all his cunning, walked into a trap at Ptolemais, was made prisoner and
ultimately slain (143). The leadership now devolved upon Simon, the last
survivor of the sons of Mattathias. He soon got the better of Tryphon,
who vainly tried to reach Jerusalem. Allying himself to Demetrius, Simon
succeeded in negotiating a treaty whereby the political independence of
Judaea was at length secured. The garrison in the Akra having been
starved into submission, Simon triumphantly entered that fortress in May
142. In the following year he was by popular decree invested with
absolute powers, being appointed leader, high priest and ethnarch. As
these offices were declared hereditary in his family, he became the
founder of the Hasmonaean dynasty. The first year of his reign (Seleucid
year 170 = 143-142 B.C.) was made the beginning of a new era, and the
issue of a Jewish coinage betokened the independence of his sovereignty.
Under Simon's administration the country enjoyed signal prosperity. Its
internal resources were assiduously developed; trade, agriculture, civic
justice and religion were fostered; while at no epoch in its post-exilic
history did Israel enjoy an equal measure of social happiness (I Macc.
xiv. 4 seq.). Simon's beneficent activities came, however, to a sudden
and tragic end. In 135 he and two of his sons were murdered by Ptolemy,
his son-in-law, who had an eye to the supreme power. But Simon's third
son, John Hyrcanus, warned in time, succeeded in asserting his rights as
hereditary head of the state. All the sons of Mattathias had now died
for the sake of "The Law"; and the result of their work, so valorously
prosecuted for over thirty years, was a new-born enthusiasm in Israel
for the ancestral faith. The Maccabaean struggle thus gave fresh life to
the Jewish nation.
After the death of Antiochus VII. Sidetes in 128 left him a free hand,
Hyrcanus (135-105) soon carved out for himself a large and prosperous
kingdom, which, however, was rent by internal discord owing to the
antagonism developed between the rival parties of the Pharisees and
Sadducees. Hyrcanus was succeeded by his son Aristobulus, whose reign of
but one year was followed by that of his brother, the warlike Alexander
Jannaeus (104-78). The new king's Sadducean proclivities rendered him
odious to the populace, which rose in revolt, but only to bring upon
itself a savage revenge. The accession of his widow Salome Alexandra
(78-69) witnessed a complete reversal of the policy pursued by Jannaeus,
for she chose to rule in accordance with the ideals of the Pharisees.
Her elder son, Hyrcanus II., a pliable weakling, was appointed high
priest; her younger son, the energetic Aristobulus, who chafed at his
exclusion from office, seized some twenty strongholds and with an army
bore down upon Jerusalem. At this crisis Alexandra died, and Hyrcanus
agreed to retire in favour of his masterful brother. A new and
disturbing element now entered into Jewish politics in the person of the
Idumaean Antipater, who for selfish ends deliberately made mischief
between the brothers. An appeal to M. Aemilius Scaurus, who in 65 came
into Syria as the legate of Pompey, led to the interference of the
Romans, the siege of Jerusalem by Pompey, and the vassalage of the Jews
(q.v.). Hyrcanus II. was appointed high priest and ethnarch, without the
title of king (63). Repeated but fruitless attempts were made by the
Hasmonaeans and their patriotic supporters to throw off the Roman yoke.
In 47 Antipater, who curried favour with Rome, was made procurator of
Judaea, and his sons Phasael and Herod governors of Jerusalem and
Galilee respectively. Six years later the Idumaean brothers were
appointed tetrarchs of Judaea. At length, in 40, the Parthians set up as
king Antigonus, sole surviving son of Aristobulus. Thereupon Phasael
committed suicide in prison, but Herod effected his escape and with the
help of the Romans seated himself on the throne of Judaea (37 B.C.).
Through the execution of Antigonus by M. Antonius (Mark Antony) the same
year the Hasmonaean dynasty became extinct.
LITERATURE.--1 and 2 Macc. and Josephus are the main sources for the
Maccabaean history. For references in classical authors see E.
Schürer, _Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes_ (1901, p 106 seq.). Besides
the numerous modern histories of Israel (e.g. those by Dérenbourg,
Ewald, Stanley, Stade, Renan, Schürer, Kent, Wellhausen, Guthe), see
also Madden, _Coins of the Jews_ (1881), H. Weiss's _Judas Makkabaeus_
(1897), and the articles in the _Ency. Bib._, Hastings's _Dict.
Bible_, the _Jewish Encyclopedia_. Among more popular sketches are
Moss's _From Malachi to Matthew_ (1893); Streanes' _The Age of the
Maccabees_ (1898); Morrison's _The Jews under Roman Rule_ ("Story of
the Nations" series); W. Fairweather's _From the Exile to the Advent_
(1901); E. R. Bevan's _Jerusalem under the High Priests_ (1904); F.
Henderson's _The Age of the Maccabees_ (1907); also, articles JEWS;
SELEUCID DYNASTY. (W. F.*)
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF, the name given to several Apocryphal books of the
Old Testament. The Vulgate contains two books of Maccabees which were
declared canonical by the council of Trent (1546) and found a place
among the Apocrypha of the English Bible. Three other books of this name
are extant. Book iii. is included in the Septuagint but not in the
Vulgate. Book iv. is embraced in the Alexandrian, Sinaitic, and other
MSS. of the Septuagint, as well as in some MSS. of Josephus. A "Fifth"
book is contained in the Ambrosian Peshitta, but it seems to be merely a
Syriac reproduction of the sixth book of Josephus's history of the
_Jewish War_. None of the books of Maccabees are contained in the
Vatican (B); all of them are found in a Syriac recension.
_1 Maccabees_ was originally written in Hebrew, but is preserved only in
a Greek translation. Origen gives a transliteration of "its Semitic
title,"[1] and Jerome says distinctly: "The First Book of Maccabees I
found in Hebrew." The frequent Hebraisms which mark the Greek
translation, as well as the fact that some obscure passages in the Greek
text are best accounted for as mistranslations from the Hebrew, afford
internal evidence of the truth of this testimony. There are good reasons
for regarding the book as a unity, although some scholars (Destinon,
followed by Wellhausen) consider the concluding chapters (xiii.-xvi.) a
later addition unknown to Josephus, who, however, seems to have already
used the Greek. It probably dates from about the beginning of the first
century B.C.[2]
As it supplies a detailed and accurate record of the forty years from
the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes to the death of Simon (175-135
B.C.), without doubt the most stirring chapter in Jewish history, the
book is one of the most precious historical sources we possess. In its
careful chronology, based upon the Seleucid era, in the minuteness of
its geographical knowledge, in the frankness with which it records
defeat as well as victory, on the restraint with which it speaks of the
enemies of the Jews, in its command of details, it bears on its face the
stamp of genuineness. Not that it is wholly free from error or
exaggeration, but its mistakes are due merely to defective knowledge of
the outside world, and its overstatements, virtually confined to the
matter of numbers, proceed from a patriotic desire to magnify Jewish
victories. While the author presumably had some written sources at his
disposal,[3] his narrative is probably for the most part founded upon
personal knowledge and recollection of the events recorded, and upon
such first-hand information as, living in the second generation after,
he would still be in a position to obtain. His sole aim is honestly to
relate what he knew of the glorious struggles of his nation.
Although written in the style of the historical books of the old
Testament, the work is characterized by a religious reticence which
avoids even the use of the divine name, and by the virtual absence of
the Messianic hope. The observance of the law is strongly urged, and the
cessation of prophecy deplored (iv. 46; xiv. 41). There is no allusion
either to the immortality of the soul or to the resurrection of the
dead. The rewards to which the dying Mattathias points his sons are all
for this life. Many scholars are of opinion that the unknown author was
a Sadducee,[4] but all that can be said with certainty is that he was a
Palestinian Jew devotedly attached to the national cause.
Until the council of Trent 1 Maccabees had only "ecclesiastical" rank,
and although not accepted as canonical by the Protestant churches, it
has always been held in high estimation. Luther says "it closely
resembles the rest of the books of Holy Scripture, and would not be
unworthy to be enumerated with them."
_2 Maccabees_, the epitome of a larger work in five books by one Jason
of Cyrene, deals with the same history as its predecessor, except that
it begins at a point one year earlier (176 B.C.), and stops short at the
death of Nicanor (161 B.C.), thus covering a period of only fifteen
years. First of all[5] the writer describes the futile attempt of
Heliodorus to rob the Temple, and the malicious intrigues of the
Benjamite Simon against the worthy high priest Onias III. (iii. i-iv.
6). As throwing light upon the situation prior to the Maccabaean revolt
this section of the book is of especial value. Chapters iv. 7-vii. 42
contain a more detailed narrative of the events recorded in 1 Macc. i.
10-64. The remainder of the book runs parallel to 1 Macc, iii.-vii.
Originally written in excellent Greek, from a pronouncedly Pharisaic
standpoint, it was possibly directed against the Hasmonaean dynasty. It
shows no sympathy with the priestly class. Both in trustworthiness and
in style it is inferior to 1 Macc. Besides being highly coloured, the
narrative does not observe strict chronological sequence. Instead of the
sober annalistic style of the earlier historian we have a work marked by
hyperbole, inflated rhetoric and homiletic reflection. Bitter invective
is heaped upon the national enemies, and strong predilection is shown
for the marvellous. The fullness and inaccuracy of detail which are a
feature of the book suggest that Jason's information was derived from
the recollections of eye-witnesses orally communicated. In spite of its
obvious defects, however, it forms a useful supplement to the first
book.
The writer's interests are religious rather than historical. In 1 Macc,
there is a keen sense of the part to be played by the Jews themselves,
of the necessity of employing their own skill and valour; here they are
made to rely rather upon divine intervention. Fantastic apparitions of
angelic and supernatural beings, gorgeously arrayed and mostly upon
horseback, are frequently introduced. In general, the views reflected in
the book are those of the Pharisees. The ungodly will be punished
mercilessly, and in exact correspondence to their sins.[6] The
chastisements of erring Jews are of short duration, and intended to
recall them to duty. If the faithful suffer martyrdom, it is in order to
serve as an example to others, and they shall be compensated by being
raised up "unto an eternal renewal of life." The eschatology of 2 Macc.
is singularly advanced, for it combines the doctrine of a resurrection
with that of immortality. It is worthy of note that the Roman Church
finds support in this book for its teaching with reference to prayers
for the dead and purgatory (xii. 43 seq.). An allusion to Jeremiah as
"he who prayeth much for the people and the holy city" (xv. 14) it
likewise appeals to as favouring its views respecting the intercession
of the saints.
Neither of Jason's work, nor of the epitomizer's, can the precise date
be determined. The changed relations with Rome (viii. 10, 36) prove,
however, that the latter was written later than 1 Macc.; and it is
equally clear that it was composed before the destruction of Jerusalem,
A.D. 70.
The account given of the martyrs in chs. vi. and vii. led to frequent
allusions to this book in early patristic literature. Only Augustine,
however, was minded to give it the canonical rank to which it has been
raised by the Roman Church. Luther judged of it as unfavourably as he
judged of 1 Macc, favourably, and even "wished it had never existed."
_3 Maccabees_, although purporting to be an historical narrative, is
really an animated, if somewhat vapid, piece of fiction written in Greek
somewhere between 100 B.C. and A.D. 70,[7] and apparently preserved only
in part.[8] It has no connexion with the Hasmonaeans, but is a story of
the deliverance experienced by the Egyptian Jews from impending
martyrdom at the hand of Ptolemy IV. Philopator, who reigned in the
century previous to the Maccabaean rising (222-205 B.C.). The title is
of later origin, and rendered possible only by the generalization of the
name Maccabee so as to embrace all who suffered for the ancestral faith.
Josephus refers the legend on which it is based to the time of Ptolemy
VII. Physcon (146-117 B.C.). Some scholars (Ewald, Reuss, Hausrath)
think that what the story really points to is the persecution under
Caligula, but in that case Ptolemy would naturally have been represented
as claiming divine honours. No other source informs us of a visit to
Jerusalem, or of a persecution of the Jews, on the part of Philopator.
Possibly, however, the story may be founded on some historical situation
regarding which we have no definite knowledge. The purpose of the writer
was evidently to cheer his Egyptian brethren during some persecution at
Alexandria. Although the book was favourably regarded in the Syrian, it
was apparently unknown to the Latin Church. Among the Jews it was
virtually ignored.
Briefly, the tale is as follows:--After the battle of Raphia[9] (217
B.C.), Ptolemy IV. Philopator insisted on entering the sanctuary at
Jerusalem, but was struck down by the Almighty in answer to the
prayers of the horrified Jews. On his return to Egypt he revenged
himself by curtailing the religious liberty of the Alexandrian Jews,
and by depriving of their civic rights all who refused to worship
Bacchus. Exasperated by their loyalty to their religion, the king
ordered all the Jews in Egypt to be imprisoned in the hippodrome of
Alexandria. Clerks were told off to prepare a list of the prisoners'
names, but after forty days constant toil they had exhausted their
writing materials without finishing their task. Ptolemy further
commanded that 500 elephants should be intoxicated and let loose upon
the occupants of the race-course. Only an accident prevented the
carrying out of this design; the king had slept until it was past the
time for his principal meal. On the following day, in virtue of a
divinely induced forgetfulness, Ptolemy recollected nothing but the
loyalty of the Jews to his throne. The same evening, nevertheless, he
repeated his order for their destruction. Accordingly, on the morning
of the third day, when the king attended to see his commands
executed, things had reached a crisis. The Jews prayed to the Lord for
mercy, and two angels appeared from heaven, to the confusion of the
royal troops, who were trampled down by the elephants. Ptolemy now
vented his wrath upon his counsellors, liberated the Jews, and feasted
them for seven days. They determined that these should be kept as
festal days henceforth in commemoration of their deliverance. The
provincial governors were enjoined to take the Jews under their
protection, and leave was given to the latter to slay those of their
kinsmen who had deserted the faith. They further celebrated their
deliverance at Ptolemais, where they built a synagogue, and they
reached their various abodes to find themselves not only reinstated in
their possessions, but raised in the esteem of the Egyptians.
_4 Maccabees_ differs essentially from the other books of this name.
While it does not itself aim at being a history, it makes striking use
of Jewish history for purposes of edification. It bears, moreover, a
distinctly philosophical character, and takes the form of a "tractate"
or discourse, addressed to Jews only,[10] upon "the supremacy of pious
reason over the passions." [11] The material is well arranged and
systematically handled. In the prologue (i. 1-12) the writer explains
the aim and scope of his work. Then follows the first main division (i.
13-iii. 18), in which he treats philosophically the proposition that
reason is the mistress of the passions, inquiring what is meant by
"reason" and what by "passion," as well as how many kinds of passion
there are, and whether reason rules them all. The conclusion reached is
that with the exception of forgetfulness and ignorance all the
affections are under the lordship of reason, or at all events of _pious_
reason. To follow the dictates of pious reason in opposition to natural
inclination is to have learned the secret of victory over the passions.
In the second part of the book (iii. 19-xviii. 5) the writer goes on to
prove his thesis from Jewish history, dwelling in particular upon the
noble stand made against the tyranny of Antiochus IV. Epiphanes by the
priest Eleazar, the seven brothers and their mother--all of whom chose
torture and death rather than apostatize from the faith. Finally he
appeals to his readers to emulate these acts of piety (xvii. 7-xviii.
24). In his gruesome descriptions of physical sufferings the author
offends against good taste even more than the writer of 2 Macc., while
both contrast very unfavourably in this respect with the sober reserve
of the gospel narratives.
The book is written in a cultured, if somewhat rhetorical, Greek style,
and is unmistakably coloured by the Stoic philosophy. The four cardinal
virtues are represented as forms of wisdom, which again is inseparable
from the Mosaic law. That the writer owes no slavish adherence to any
philosophical system is plain from his independent treatment of the
affections. Although influenced by Hellenism, he is a loyal Jew,
earnestly desirous that all who profess the same faith should adhere to
it in spite of either Greek allurements or barbaric persecution. It is
not to reason as such, but only to pious reason (i.e. to reason
enlightened and controlled by the divine law), that he attributes
lordship over the passions. While in his zeal for legalism he virtually
adopts the standpoint of Pharisaism, he is at one with Jewish Hellenism
in substituting belief in the soul's immortality for the doctrine of a
bodily resurrection.
The name of the author is unknown. He was, however, clearly a
Hellenistic Jew, probably resident in Alexandria or Asia Minor. In the
early Church the work was commonly ascribed to Josephus and incorporated
with his writings. But apart from the fact that it is found also in
several MSS. of the Septuagint, the language and style of the book are
incompatible with his authorship. So also is the circumstance that 2
Macc., which forms the basis of 4 Macc., was unknown to Josephus.
Moreover, several unhistorical statements (such as, e.g. that Seleucus
was succeeded by his _son_ Antiochus Epiphanes, iv. 15) militate
against the view that Josephus was the author. The date of composition
cannot be definitely fixed. It is, however, safe to say that the book
must have been written later than 2 Macc., and (in view of the
acceptance it met with in the Christian Church) prior to the destruction
of Jerusalem. Most likely it is a product of the Herodian period.
_5 Maccabees._ Writing in 1566 Sixtus Senensis mentions having seen at
Lyons a manuscript of a so-called "Fifth Book of Maccabees" in the
library of Santas Pagninus, which was soon afterwards destroyed by fire.
It began with the words: "After the murder of Simon, John his son became
high priest in his stead." Sixtus conjectures that it may have been a
Greek translation of the "chronicles" of John Hyrcanus, alluded to in 1
Macc., xvi. 24. He acknowledges that it is a history of Hyrcanus
practically on the lines of Josephus, but concludes from its Hebraistic
style that it was not from that writer's pen. The probability, however,
is that it was "simply a reproduction of Josephus, the style being
changed perhaps for a purpose" (Schürer).
The Arabic "Book of Maccabees" contained in the Paris and London
Polyglotts, and purporting to be a history of the Jews from the affair
of Heliodorus (186 B.C.) to the close of Herod's reign, is historically
worthless, being nothing but a compilation from 1 and 2 Macc. and
Josephus. In the one chapter (xii.) where the writer ventures to detach
himself from these works he commits glaring historical blunders. The
book was written in somewhat Hebraistic Greek subsequent to A.D. 70. In
Cotton's English translation of _The Five Books of Maccabees_ it is this
book that is reckoned the "Fifth."
The best modern editions of the Greek text of the four books of
Maccabees are those of O. F. Fritzsche (1871) and H. B. Swete
(Cambridge Septuagint, vol. iii., 1894). C. J. Ball's _The Variorum
Apocrypha_ will be found specially useful by those who cannot
conveniently consult the Greek. The best modern commentary is that of
C. L. W. Grimm (1853-1857). C. F. Keil's commentary on 1 and 2 Macc.
is very largely indebted to Grimm. More recently there have appeared
commentaries by E. C. Bissell on 1, 2 and 3 Macc. in Lange-Schaff's
commentary, 1880--the whole Apocrypha being embraced in one volume,
and much of the material being transferred from Grimm; G. Rawlinson on
1 and 2 Macc. in the _Speaker's Commentary_ 1888 (containing much
useful matter, but marred by too frequent inaccuracy); O. Zöckler, on
1, 2 and 3 Macc., 1891 (slight and unsatisfactory); W. Fairweather and
J. S. Black on 1 Macc. in the _Cambridge Bible for Schools_ (1897); E.
Kautzsch on 1 and 3 Macc., A. Kamphausen on 2 Macc. and A. Deissmann
on 4 Macc. in _Die Apok. u. Pseudepigr. des Alt. Test._, 1898 (a most
serviceable work for the student of apocryphal literature). Brief but
useful introductions to all the four books of Maccabees are given in
E. Schürer's _Geschichte des Judischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu
Christi_ (3rd ed., 1898-1901; Eng. tr. of earlier edition, 1886-1890).
(W. F.*)