Changes

==Canonical status==

==Canonical status==

The First and Second Books of Maccabees are regarded by Jews and Protestants as apocryphal, that is, not inspired Scripture, because they were not contained in the Jewish list of books drawn up at the end of A.D. the first century. They have always been accepted as contained in the traditional Septuagint since the beginning of the 1st century, used as scripture accepted by Greek-speaking Jews, and accepted as inspired books of the Old Testament since the middle of the 1st century by the ancient church of the apostles and the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. They are called “deuterocanonical” to indicate that they are canonical even though they have been disputed by some.<ref>[http://www.scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament]</ref> I, II, III, and IV Maccabees are included in the Biblical canon of the [[Ethiopian Orthodox Church]].

The First and Second Books of Maccabees are regarded by Jews and Protestants as apocryphal, that is, not inspired Scripture, because they were not contained in the Jewish list of books drawn up at the end of A.D. the first century. They have always been accepted as an integral part of the traditional Septuagint since the beginning of the 1st century, used as scripture accepted by Greek-speaking Jews before the birth of Christ, and during his ministry and after his ascension, and accepted as inspired books of the Old Testament since the middle of the 1st century by the ancient church of the apostles and the Catholic and Orthodox Church in the east and west. They are called "[[Deuterocanonicals|deuterocanonical]]" to indicate that they are canonical even though they have been disputed by some.<ref>[http://www.scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament]</ref>

 

The four books of I, II, III, and IV Maccabees are included in the Biblical canon of the [[Ethiopian Orthodox Church]].

==Name==

==Name==

The name, Maccabee, probably means "hammer", which is the traditional interpretation. It is actually applied in the Books of Maccabees to only one man, Judas Maccabeus ("'''Mac'''-cab-'''be'''-es", "Maccabe-es") third son of the priest Mattathias and first leader of the revolt against the Seleucid kings who persecuted the Jews (1 Mc 2:4, 66; 2 Mc 8:5, 16; 10:1, 16). Traditionally the name has come to be extended to the 4 brothers of Judas, to his supporters, and even to other Jewish heroes of the period, such as the seven brothers (2 Maccabees chapter 7).

The name, [[Maccabee]] (Hebrew: <big>'''מכבי'''</big>), is probably derived from the Hebrew word ''makkabah'', "hammer", and this has become the traditional interpretation of its meaning. It is actually applied in the Books of Maccabees to only one man, Judas Maccabeus ("'''Mac'''-cab-'''be'''-es", "Maccabe-es") third son of the priest Mattathias and first leader of the revolt against the Seleucid kings who persecuted the Jews (1 Maccabees 2:4, 66; 2 Maccabees 8:5, 16; 10:1, 16), the "Hammer" of the resistance. Traditionally the name, "the Maccabees", has come to be extended to the 4 brothers of Judas and his supporters, and even to other Jewish heroes of the period, such as the seven brothers (2 Maccabees chapter 7).

In the Septuagint the title of the book is '''ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Α'''. <br/>In the Vulgate under the heading '''Machabaeorum''' the title of the book is '''Machabaeorum I'''. <br/>In the Douay-Rheims Bible the title of the book is '''I Machabees'''.<br/>In the Apocrypha the title of the book is '''I Maccabees'''. The most common English spelling today is 1 Maccabees, or First Maccabees.

In the Septuagint the title of the book is '''ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Α'''. <br/>In the Vulgate under the heading '''Machabaeorum''' the title of the book is '''Machabaeorum I'''. <br/>In the Douay-Rheims Bible the title of the book is '''I Machabees'''.<br/>In the Apocrypha the title of the book is '''I Maccabees'''. The most common English spelling today is '''1 Maccabees''', or First Maccabees.

 

The title is commonly abbreviated in commentaries and footnotes as '''1 Macc.''' or '''1 Mc.'''.

==Contents==

==Contents==

The two Books of Maccabees contain independent accounts of events (in part identical) that accompanied the attempted suppression of Judaism in Palestine in the second century B.C. The vigorous reaction to this attempt established for a time the religious and political independence of the Jews, which lasted from 146 B.C. until 63 B.C..

The two Books of the Maccabees contain independent (in part identical) accounts of events that occurred during the attempted suppression of Judaism in Palestine in the second century B.C.. The vigorous reaction to this attempt established for a time the religious and political independence of the Jews, under the priestly dynastic rule of the [[Hasmoneans]], which lasted from 146 B.C. until 63 B.C..

'''First Maccabees''' is one of the Historical books of the Bible, similar in tone to the books of Kings and Chronicles and Joshua and Judges. It covers the history of the Jews from the time of the rise of [[Alexander the Great]] during the [[high priest|high priesthood]] of [[Jaddua]] about 333 B.C., through the persecution of [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]], the resistance of the [[Maccabee]]s, to the beginning of the high priesthood of [[John Hyrcanus]] I of the [[Hasmoneans|Hasmonean Dynasty]] and the establishment of the independent kingdom of Judea about 124 B.C.. It demonstrates the miraculous providence of God in preserving the nation in the face of violent religious oppression, and the overcoming of pagan forces seeking the annihilation of the Jews and the destruction of the books (scrolls) of the sacred scriptures containing the written Word of God.

'''First Maccabees''' is one of the Historical books of the Bible, similar in tone to the books of Kings and Chronicles and Joshua and Judges. It covers the history of the Jews beginning from the (briefly mentioned) time of the rise of [[Alexander the Great]] during the [[High Priest|high priesthood]] of [[Jaddua]] about 333 B.C. (Nehemiah 12:10-11, 22), and continues through the details of the persecution of [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]], and the war of resistance of the [[Maccabee]]s, to the beginning of the high priesthood of [[John Hyrcanus I]] of the [[Hasmoneans|Hasmonean Dynasty]] and the establishment of the independent kingdom of Judea about 124 B.C.. The book is written as a testimony and witness demonstrating to its hearers the miraculous providence of God in preserving the nation in the face of violent religious oppression, and the overcoming of pagan forces seeking the annihilation of the Jews and the systematic destruction of the books (scrolls) of the sacred scriptures containing the written Word of God.

Chapter 4:36-59 relates the triumphant recovery and dedication of the Temple after the defilement of the pagans and apostate Jews who had gone over to [[Hellenism]]. The '''Feast of the Dedication''' is mentioned in the Gospel According to John, chapter 10:22-23. Today this celebration is called '''[[Ḥanukkah]]'''.

 

Chapter 4:36-59 relates the triumphant recovery and dedication of the Temple after the defilement of the pagans and those apostate Jews who had gone over to [[Hellenism]]. The '''Feast of the Dedication''' is mentioned in the [[Gospel of John|Gospel According to John]], chapter 10:22-23. Today this celebration is called '''[[Ḥanukkah]]'''.

===Divisions of the book===

===Divisions of the book===

   

   

First Maccabees can be divided as follows:

First Maccabees can be divided as follows:

Crisis and Response (1:1–2:70)

Crisis and Response (1:1–2:70)

Leadership of Judas Maccabeus (3:1–9:22)

<br/>Leadership of Judas Maccabeus (3:1–9:22)

Leadership of Jonathan (9:23–12:53)

<br/>Leadership of Jonathan (9:23–12:53)

Leadership of Simon (13:1–16:24)

<br/>Leadership of Simon (13:1–16:17)

 

<br/>Succession of John Hyrcanus (16:18-24)

===Chapter summary headings===

===Chapter summary headings===

See [[Literalist Bible chronology]]

See [[Literalist Bible chronology]]

==Historical setting==

==Historical-grammatical analysis: Historical setting==

The book is our most important historical source for the period of Jewish history that it describes. Josephus considered it to be reliable; he paraphrased I Macc. 1:11-13:42 in books twelve and thirteen of his Antiquities of the Jews. With its extensive use of official documents and precise dates, I Maccabees purports to be an accurate account of the Maccabean revolt. At the same time, it has an unmistakable point of view. Written in the style of I and 2 Kings (see I Macc. 9:22; 16:23-24), it portrays the Maccabees as God's chosen instruments (5:62) and worthy successors of earlier kings and priests of Israel. As we discuss the narrative in more detail, we will note some of the connections the book makes between the Maccabees and these earlier heroes.

The book's ending seems to indicate that it was completed sometime after the end of John Hyrcanus's reign in 104 B.C. On the other hand, since it speaks of the Romans in favorable-even idealistic-terms (see I Macc. 8:1-16), it was certainly written before 63 B.C., when a Roman takeover of Jerusalem under Pompey ended Hasmonean rule.

Background: The Challenge of Hellenism

The book is our most important historical source for the period of Jewish history it describes. Josephus considered it to be reliable; he paraphrased 1 Maccabees 1:11-13:42 in books twelve and thirteen of his ''Antiquities of the Jews''. 1 Maccabees, with its extensive use of official documents and precise dates, purports to be an accurate account of the Maccabean revolt, and at the same time, the book has an unmistakable point of view. Written in the style of 1 and 2 Kings (see 1 Maccabees 9:22; 16:23-24), it portrays the Maccabees as God's chosen instruments (5:62) and worthy successors of earlier kings and priests of Israel. The book makes several connections between these earlier heroes and the Maccabees. In them is combined for the first time in Jewish history the offices of high priest and king of the people. Compare [[Pope]].

First Maccabees begins with the rise to power of Alexander the Great, who conquered the empire of the Medes and Persians (including the land of Israel) and set up his own Graeco-Macedonian empire in its place (1:1-4; cf. Dan. 8:5-7, 20-21). Shortly before Alexander died in 323 B.C., he divided his vast territories among four of his "most honored officers" (1:6; Dan. 8:8, 22). One of those officers, Ptolemy, controlled Palestine. Ptolemy and his successors in Egypt ruled over the Jews until 198 B.C. After that, Israel came under the authority of the Syrian Seleucids, whose empire was headquartered at Antioch.

===Historical, religious, cultural background: the Challenge of Hellenism===

Although Alexander's rule was shortlived (twelve years, according to I Macc. 1:7), policies that he set in motion had a profound effect on the world for centuries to come. A pupil of Aristotle and lover of Greek ways, Alexander hoped to use Greek language, learning, and culture to unite the empire. To this end, he founded Greek cities (poleis) throughout his territories. Dr. Oskar Skarsaune [5, p. 31] gives the following description of a typical polis:

First Maccabees begins with the rise to power of Alexander the Great. He had conquered the empire of the Medes and Persians (including the land of Israel) and set up his own Graeco-Macedonian empire in its place (1:1-4; cf. Dan. 8:5-7, 20-21). Just before he died in 323 B.C., he divided his vast territories among four of his "most honored officers" (1:6; Daniel 8:8, 22). One of those officers, Ptolemy, controlled Palestine, and he and his successors in Egypt ruled over the Jews until 198 B.C., when Israel came under the authority of the Syrian Seleucids, whose empire was headquartered at Antioch.

====The importance of the Greek polis====

By means of the poleis, Greek culture was introduced to surrounding areas and mingled with the native cultures of those regions, creating a cultural synthesis called Hellenism. Correspondingly, the spread of Greek language and customs was known as "Hellenization" (see 2 Macc. 4:13).

In their interactions with Greek culture, the various native cultures did not enjoy a "level playing field." Although the Greeks had some admiration for the more ancient cultures of their empire ([5, pp. 29-30]), they were still the ones in charge. Skarsaune comments, "Greek culture was the culture of the conquerors, the rulers, the armies and the new business elite. Greek was the language of government and administration, business and commerce. And Greek literature was taken as the supreme model for all kinds of literary production. In other words, Greek culture was the culture of the new era, and anyone who would belong to the new elite had to adopt it" [5, p. 28].

Although Alexander's rule was shortlived (twelve years, according to I Macc. 1:7), the policies that he set in motion had a profound effect on the world for centuries to come. A pupil of Aristotle and lover of Greek ways, Alexander hoped to use Greek language, learning, and culture to unite the empire. To this end, he founded Greek cities (''poleis'') throughout his territories. Dr. Oskar Skarsaune [5, p. 31] gives the following description of a typical polis:

The attractions of the dominant Greek culture thus created great pressure to Hellenize. As a result, a number of ancient cultures were swallowed up by Hellenism and essentially disappeared from history.

<blockquote>"A polis contained some obligatory institutions: a public town center and marketplace (the square agora); a hall for the city council (the bouleuterion); baths; temples to the Greek (later Roman) gods; a theater; a gymnasium (a combined higher school and sports training ground); preferably a library and a sports stadium; and if a big city, also a hippodrome."

By means of the poleis, Greek culture was introduced to surrounding areas and mingled with the native cultures of those regions, creating a cultural synthesis called Hellenism. Correspondingly, the spread of Greek language and customs was known as "Hellenization" (see 2 Macc. 4:13).</blockquote>

On the other hand, Hellenism created temptations for Jews to compromise the aspects of Torah-e.g., the Sabbath, circumcision, and dietary laws-that set them apart as a unique and distinct people. By remaining separate from the Gentiles, some reasoned, Jews were missing out on the wealth and prestige afforded by Hellenism.

In their interactions with Greek culture, the various native cultures did not enjoy a "level playing field." Although the Greeks had some admiration for the more ancient cultures of their empire ([5, pp. 29-30]), they were still the ones in charge. Skarsaune comments,<blockquote> "Greek culture was the culture of the conquerors, the rulers, the armies and the new business elite. Greek was the language of government and administration, business and commerce. And Greek literature was taken as the supreme model for all kinds of literary production. In other words, Greek culture was the culture of the new era, and anyone who would belong to the new elite had to adopt it" [5, p. 28].</blockquote>

Thus the dominant Greek culture created great pressure to Hellenize through its attractions. A number of ancient cultures essentially disappeared from history as a result, swallowed up by Hellenism.

By the time Antiochus IV, a greedy and power-hungry man, took over the Seleucid throne in 175 B.C. (I Macc. 1:10), there was apparently considerable controversy in Judea over Hellenism (vv. 11-15). One of those who favored Hellenization was Yeshua (a.k..a. Jason), the brother of Onias the high priest. Jason bribed the new king in order to seize control of the high priesthood from Onias.

Hellenism offered both opportunities and temptations for the Jews. Ultimately, Jewish thought was greatly enriched by certain Greek concepts. A prime example is the Greek idea that "the hidden law governing the entire universe is divine reason, ''[[logos]]'', and the moral task of humanity is to live a life of conformity to this divine reason, which is the law of ethics as well as the law of nature" [5, p. 35]. Beginning with the author of [[Book of Sirach|Sirach]] in the early second century B.C. (c. 150), Jewish thinkers identified the underlying universal law as God's Torah (see especially Sirach 24). Thus, a Hellenistic concept, ''logos'', led to the exaltation of the God of Israel and the promotion of his inspired word, finding its purest expression in the words of the beginning of the Gospel of John:

<blockquote>"In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" [http://biblehub.com/multi/john/1-1.htm John 1:1].</blockquote>

The book of 2 Maccabees tells us that Jason set aside the authority of Torah and took steps to turn Jerusalem into a Greek polis (2 Macc. 4:9-17). I Maccabees 1:11-15 does not mention Jason's name explicitly, but he was certainly among the "renegades" referred to in those verses. Jason probably rationalized his corrupt actions by claiming that his Hellenization program was in the best interests of the people. Instead, his takeover of the high priesthood set in motion a sequence of events that led to one of the greatest crises in the history of Israel.

However, Hellenism also created temptations for Jews to compromise aspects of the ''[[Torah]]''—the Sabbath, circumcision, and dietary laws—which set them apart as a unique and distinct people, as being identifiably those who worship and serve the only real God. Some Jews and Greeks reasoned that, by remaining separate from the Gentiles, the Jewish people and the nation were missing out on the wealth and prestige also afforded by Hellenism.

The Abomination of Desolation

By the time the greedy and power-hungry Seleucid, Antiochus IV, took over the Seleucid throne in 175 B.C. (1 Maccabees 1:10), there seems to have arisen a considerable controversy in Judea over the issue of Hellenism (1:11-15). One of those who favored Hellenization was ''Yeshua'' (called Jason), the brother of Onias (III) the high priest. Jason handsomely bribed the new king in order to seize control of the high priesthood from Onias.

Jason was not in power for long. Ironically, his subordinate Menelaus double-crossed him in much the same way that he had ousted Onias. When Jason sent Menelaus to Antiochus on official business in 172 B.C., Menelaus managed to grab the high priesthood for himself by offering a bribe higher than Jason's (2 Macc. 4:23-24).

The [[2 Maccabees|Second Book of Maccabees]] tells us that Jason despised the authority of ''Torah'' by taking steps to transform Jerusalem into a Greek polis (2 Maccabees 4:9-17). First Maccabees 1:11-15 does not explicitly mention Jason's name, but it is evident that he was chief among the "renegades" referred to in those verses. Jason probably rationalized his corrupt actions by claiming that his Hellenization program was in the best interests of the people. Instead, his takeover of the high priesthood set in motion a sequence of events that led to one of the greatest spiritual and cultural crises in the history of Israel.<blockquote>"All the Gentiles accepted the command of the king. Many even from Israel gladly adopted his religion; they sacrificed to idols and profaned the sabbath." 1 Maccabees 1:43.</blockquote>

Menelaus, another Hellenizer, seems to have been mainly concerned with staying in office and lining his own pockets. His acts of treachery included arranging for Onias to be murdered and plundering gold vessels from the temple (2 Macc. 4:25-34).

====The Abomination of Desolation====

In 169 B.C., when a false rumor arose that Antiochus had been killed in battle in Egypt, Jason tried unsuccessfully to regain control of Jerusalem (2 Macc. 5:5-10). Antiochus then hurried to Jerusalem to put down the uprising. At Menelaus's invitation, the king raided the temple (I Macc. 1:20-28; 2 Macc. 5:11-16) before returning to Antioch.

Ironically, when Jason sent his subordinate Menelaus to Antiochus on official business in 172 B.C., Menelaus double-crossed him in much the same way that Jason had ousted Onias, and managed to grab the high priesthood for himself by outbidding and offering a bribe to the greedy king much richer than Jason's (2 Maccabees 4:23-24).

Two years later, Antiochus sent his general Apollonius to Jerusalem with a large force to consolidate Seleucid control over Judea. Apollonius killed large numbers of Menelaus's opponents in a cruel attack that took place on the Sabbath day (I Macc. 1:29-32; 2 Macc. 5:24-26). He then expanded or rebuilt Akra, a fortress citadel located near the temple, where he stationed a garrison of Syrians and Hellenized Jews (I Macc. 1: 33-40).

Menelaus was another Hellenizer, and he seems to have been mainly concerned with staying in office and lining his own pockets. He quietly arranged for Onias to be murdered, causing a cry of outrage from both pagans and Jews, and created additional scandal by plundering gold vessels from the temple, giving some of them to the assassin Andronicus, and selling the others to surrounding cities (2 Macc. 4:25-34). When the Jews appealed to Antiochus against Andronicus, he stripped him, had him marched round the city naked and executed him.

These were only the beginning of Antiochus's repressive measures against the Jews. Apparently viewing any type of Jewish religious practice as a threat to his authority, he proceeded to outlaw temple sacrifices, circumcision, Sabbath and festival observance, and reading of the scriptures (I Macc. 1:41-61; 2 Macc.6:1-11). Worst of all, he established idolatrous pagan worship at the temple (2 Macc. 6:1-5). As I Macc. 1:54 puts it, the king's men "erected a desolating sacrilege on the altar of burnt offering." This phrase identifies Antiochus's blasphemous sacrifices as the "abomination of desolation" prophesied in Daniel 11:31.

In 169 B.C., Jason, hearing a false rumor that Antiochus had been killed in battle in Egypt, tried unsuccessfully to oust Menelaus and regain control of Jerusalem (2 Macc. 5:5-10), even burning the gates of the city (2 Maccabees 1:7-8). Antiochus then hurried to Jerusalem with his forces to put down the uprising. At Menelaus's invitation, the king raided the temple before returning to Antioch (1 Macc. 1:20-28; 2 Macc. 5:11-16).

No one knows exactly why Antiochus IV persecuted the Jews so harshly. Certainly his judgment was impaired by greed and arrogance, an arrogance reflected in the name he gave himself-"Epiphanes," which means "the manifest [one]." (In other words, he claimed to be a god in human form.) Among the Jews he came to be known as Epimanes ("the madman"), a more fitting designation [4, p.465].

 

 

Historians do not know exactly why Antiochus IV persecuted the Jews so harshly. Certainly his judgment was impaired by greed and an arrogance reflected in the name he gave himself—"''Epiphanes''", "the manifest [one]."—he claimed to be a god manifest in human form. The Jews changed this title to a more fitting designation so that he came to be known as ''Epimanes'' ("the madman").

==[[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|Historical-critical]] textual analysis==

==[[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|Historical-critical]] textual analysis==

Daniel J. Harrington (''Invitation to the Apocrypha'', p. 135) says there has been a puzzling ambivalence about 1 and 2 Maccabees in the Jewish tradition, since Hanukkah, which celebrates the cleansing and rededication of the Jerusalem temple in 164 B.C.E. under Judas, is part of the traditional Jewish calendar of festivals. Although it is a minor holiday (except in countries where its proximity to Christmas has made it very significant), the 'biblical basis' for it lies in books not regarded by Jews as canonical. Harrington pointedly states that the absence 1 Maccabees from the canon of Hebrew Scriptures is somewhat puzzling, since according to all the textual evidence it is likely that was originally composed in Hebrew. These puzzlements have led some scholars to suspect that there was a Jewish reaction at some point in the first century against the Maccabees and what they stood for, and a deliberate attempt to push them out of the sacred tradition of Judaism. Harrington speculates that perhaps 'messianic' claims were being made about Judas Maccabeus, or about some other figure who traced his ancestry back to the Maccabean movement. In light of failed uprising against the Romans by Jews claiming to follow the example of Judas and his brothers, the custodians of the Jewish tradition perhaps found the Maccabees too controversial and dangerous. Harrington says the relatively recent revival of interest in the Maccabees as men of action and noble warriors within the modern state of Israel suggests that these suspicions have some basis in fact.

Daniel J. Harrington (''Invitation to the Apocrypha'', p. 135) says there has been a puzzling ambivalence about 1 and 2 Maccabees in the Jewish tradition, since Hanukkah, which celebrates the cleansing and rededication of the Jerusalem temple in 164 B.C.E. under Judas, is part of the traditional Jewish calendar of festivals. Although it is a minor holiday (except in countries where its proximity to Christmas has made it very significant), the 'biblical basis' for it lies in books not regarded by Jews as canonical. Harrington pointedly states that the absence 1 Maccabees from the canon of Hebrew Scriptures is somewhat puzzling, since according to all the textual evidence it is likely that was originally composed in Hebrew. These puzzlements have led some scholars to suspect that there was a Jewish reaction at some point in the first century against the Maccabees and what they stood for, and a deliberate attempt to push them out of the sacred tradition of Judaism. Harrington speculates that perhaps 'messianic' claims were being made about Judas Maccabeus, or about some other figure who traced his ancestry back to the Maccabean movement. In light of failed uprising against the Romans by Jews claiming to follow the example of Judas and his brothers, the custodians of the Jewish tradition perhaps found the Maccabees too controversial and dangerous. Harrington says the relatively recent revival of interest in the Maccabees as men of action and noble warriors within the modern state of Israel suggests that these suspicions have some basis in fact.

Of the four books which pass under this name—I, II, III, and IV Maccabees—historical critics have judged on the basis of their assessment of historical evidence that the first is the only one of the four which can be regarded as a reliable historical source.

Of the four books which pass under this name—I, II, III, and IV Maccabees—historical critics have judged, on the basis of their assessment of the available historical evidence, that the first is the only one of the four which can be regarded as a reliable historical source.

===Original Language===

===Original Language===

From the Semitic idioms which occur throughout the work it is clearly evident that 1 Maccabees was composed in a Semitic language (see, for example, 2:40; 4:2), and with great clearness certain passages indicate that the original language was Hebrew (see 2:39, 3:19). Origen and Jerome also bear testimony to this evident fact, though it is possible that the version or paraphrase known to them was Aramaic. The enthusiasm of the writer at times rises to a high pitch and breaks out into poetry of a genuine Semitic character (compare 3:3-9). Throughout the work the style of the narrative is modeled on that of the historical books of the Old Testament simple, terse, restrained, and objective. The fact that due weight is given and proper proportions are observed in treating the different parts of the narrative proves the author to have been a writer of considerable skill. His datings of all events are according to the terms of the Seleucid era which have a known correspondence to the current [[Gregorian calendar]].

Although there are no surviving Hebrew manuscripts of the book, scholars universally agree that it was originally written in Hebrew and subsequently translated into Greek. From the Semitic idioms which occur throughout the work it is clearly evident that 1 Maccabees was composed in a Semitic language (see, for example, 2:40; 4:2), and with great clearness certain passages indicate that the original language was Hebrew (see 2:39, 3:19). Origen and Jerome also bear testimony to this evident fact, though it is possible that the version or paraphrase known to them was Aramaic.

As shown above, the Hebrew original does not seem not to have borne the name "Maccabees," and what its real designation was is not known. Eusebius ("Hist. Eccl." vi. 25) quotes Origen as authority for the name '''Σαρβηθ Σαβαναι''', a name which has been explained in many different ways. For some of these see Grimm ("''Das Erste Buch der Makkabäer''," page xvii.). Torrey (Cheyne and Black, "Encyc. Bibl.") follow Dalman ("''Grammar''," p. 6), who takes the name as a corruption of "Book of the Hasmoneans". If this is the correct interpretation, an Aramaic translation of the book must have been made at an early time, and this was the translation known to Origen and Jerome—a view which does not seem improbable. In any case, the Hebrew was certainly translated very early into Greek, and the Greek only has survived. It seems to be a literal one, often preserving the Semitic, and sometimes even the Hebrew, idiom; but it is clear, on the whole, that the Greek form of the text is most probably a satisfactory translation. It is transmitted to us in three uncial manuscripts of the Septuagint—the Codex Sinaiticus, the Codex Alexandrinus, and the Codex Venetus—as well as in several cursives.

According to Dr. David A. deSilva [1, p. 247], "Translating the book back into Hebrew offers relatively few challenges and has been used to clear up difficulties in the Greek text, a fact that weighs heavily in favor of a Hebrew original standing behind the Septuagint tradition." As shown above, the Hebrew original does not seem not to have borne the name "Maccabees," and what its real designation was is not known. Eusebius ("Hist. Eccl." vi. 25) quotes Origen as authority for the name '''Σαρβηθ Σαβαναι''' ''Sarbeth Sabanai'', a name which has been explained in many different ways. For some of these see Grimm ("''Das Erste Buch der Makkabäer''," page xvii.). Torrey (Cheyne and Black, "Encyc. Bibl.") follow Dalman ("''Grammar''," p. 6), who takes the name as a corruption of "Book of the Hasmoneans". If this is the correct interpretation, an Aramaic translation of the book must have been made at an early time, and this was the translation known to Origen and Jerome—a view which does not seem improbable. In any case, the Hebrew text was certainly translated very early into Greek, and the Greek only has survived. It seems to be a literal one, often preserving the Semitic, and sometimes even the Hebrew, idiom; but it is clear, on the whole, that the Greek form of the text is most probably a satisfactory translation. It is transmitted to us in three uncial manuscripts of the Septuagint—the Codex Sinaiticus, the Codex Alexandrinus, and the Codex Venetus—as well as in several cursives.

===Author===

===Author===

No information about the author himself is obtainable beyond that which may be inferred from the book itself. He was a devout and patriotic Jew who lived and wrote in Palestine. This latter fact is proved by his intimate and exact geographical knowledge of the Holy Land (compare 3:24; 7:19; 9:2-4, 33, 34, 43; 12:36-40; 13:22, 23; 16:5, 6) in opposition to the opinion of Neil J. McEleney (above), and by his lack of accurate knowledge of any of the foreign countries which he mentions, in agreement with McEleney. As always, in Higher Critical studies, what one scholar holds to be very probable another considers to be very unlikely, even in careful consideration of the same data. The author shows himself a loyal admirer of the Hasmonean family; he believed that to this chosen family Israel owed her deliverance and existence. He admired not only the military deeds of Judas (compare 5:63), but also those of Jonathan (compare 10:15-21) and Simon (compare 14:4-15). The narrative is told as though it was due to the military genius of these men, exercised under the favoring guidance of God (i. 64, iii. 8), and not solely a divine deliverance of the people and the nation by the direct intervention of God. Curiously enough the word "God" does not appear in the work, nor does the word "Lord." However, the idea itself, as in the Book of Esther, is not lacking but is represented by "Heaven," or by the pronoun "He." In spite of this mannerism, the author was a deeply religious man, very zealous for the Law and for his peoples' national religious institutions (see 1:11, 15, 43; ii. 20-22; 3:21), for the Scriptures (1:56, 3:48), and for the Temple (1:21, 39; 3:43).

No information about the author himself is obtainable beyond that which may be inferred from the book itself. The author of First Maccabees probably lived in the Holy Land, since he was very familiar with the geography of the region and had access to official documents that would have been archived in Jerusalem. That he was a devout and patriotic Jew who lived and wrote in Palestine is proved by his intimate and exact geographical knowledge of the Holy Land (compare 3:24; 7:19; 9:2-4, 33, 34, 43; 12:36-40; 13:22, 23; 16:5, 6), an opinion which does not accord with the opinion of Neil J. McEleney (above), and proved also by his lack of accurate knowledge of any of the foreign countries which he mentions, which does accord with McEleney. As always, in Higher Critical studies, what one scholar holds to be very probable another considers to be very unlikely, even when considering the same data and the same texts.

 

First Maccabees was certainly written by a supporter of the Hasmoneans. The author shows himself a loyal admirer of the Hasmonean family. He believed that to this chosen family Israel owed her deliverance and existence. He admired not only the military deeds of Judas (compare 5:63), but also those of Jonathan (compare 10:15-21) and Simon (compare 14:4-15).

===Date===

===Date===

Throughout the work the priesthood is represented in a favorable light. The renegade priests Jason and Menelaus are not mentioned—a striking contrast with the treatment given them in the Second Book of the Maccabees. Geiger conjectured from these facts that the author was a Sadducee, and most recent writers follow his opinion, although they fault him for calling the First Book of the Maccabees a ''partisan'' document; its temperate and just tone certainly redeems it from such a narrow emphasis. The ''terminus a quo'' (earliest possible date) of the work is found in the fact that John Hyrcanus I, who began to reign in 135 B.C., is mentioned at the close of the book (16:21-24). As the Romans are presented throughout in terms of respect and friendliness, it is clear that the ''terminus ad quem'' (latest possible date) must be found at some time before the conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 B.C.. Scholars are not agreed on whether the date can be more nearly determined, and the determining fact is held by most to be the statement in 16:23, 24, that the "rest of the acts of John...are written in the chronicles of his high-priesthood." Many think that this implies that John had died and that a sufficient time had elapsed since his death to permit the circulation of the chronicles. Bissell (Lange's "''Commentary''," page 479) thinks that no more than a score or two of years had passed, while Schürer ("''Hist. of the Jewish People,''" div. ii., vol. iii., p. 8) and Fairweather (in "''Cambridge Bible''" and Hastings, "''Dict. Bible''") think that not more than a decade or two had elapsed, and they date the work in the first or second decade of the first century B.C. Torrey, on the other hand, concludes ("''Encyc. Bibl.''") that this reference to the chronicle of the priesthood is an imitation of well-known passages in the Books of Kings, that it was intended solely as a compliment to John, and that the work instead was composed early in his reign (that is, soon after 135 B.C.) by one who had been an interested observer of the whole Maccabean movement. The vivid character of the narrative, and the fact that it closes so abruptly after the death of Simon, make this a very plausible view.

The author's datings of all events are according to the terms of the Seleucid era which have a known correspondence to the current [[Gregorian calendar]]. The ''terminus a quo'' (earliest possible date) of the work is found in the fact that John Hyrcanus I, who began to reign in 135 B.C., is mentioned at the close of the book (16:21-24). As the Romans are presented throughout in terms of respect and friendliness, it is clear that the ''terminus ad quem'' (latest possible date) must be found at some time before the conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 B.C.. Scholars are not agreed on whether the date can be more nearly determined, and the determining fact is held by most to be the statement in 16:23, 24, that the "rest of the acts of John...are written in the chronicles of his high-priesthood." Many think that this implies that John had died and that a sufficient time had elapsed since his death to permit the circulation of the chronicles. Bissell (Lange's "''Commentary''," page 479) thinks that no more than a score or two of years had passed, while Schürer ("''Hist. of the Jewish People,''" div. ii., vol. iii., p. 8) and Fairweather (in "''Cambridge Bible''" and Hastings, "''Dict. Bible''") think that not more than a decade or two had elapsed, and they date the work in the first or second decade of the first century B.C. Torrey, on the other hand, concludes ("''Encyc. Bibl.''") that this reference to the chronicle of the priesthood is an imitation of well-known passages in the Books of Kings, that it was intended solely as a compliment to John, and that the work instead was composed early in his reign (that is, soon after 135 B.C.) by one who had been an interested observer of the whole Maccabean movement. The vivid character of the narrative, and the fact that it closes so abruptly after the death of Simon, make this a very plausible view.

===Sources and Integrity===

===Sources and Integrity===

J. D. Michaelis insists that Josephus used the Hebrew original of the book, which differed in some important particulars from the present Greek text. Destinon ("Die Quellen des Josephus," 1882) revived this theory and endeavored to prove (pages 80 and following) that chapters 14-16 were not contained in the edition used by Josephus. Destinon bases his argument on the fact that Josephus treats these chapters very sparsely in comparison with his treatment of the other material of the same book, although these chapters contain just as much material and just as interesting. Wellhausen ("I. J. G." pages 222 and following) follows him. But Torrey (in "Encyc. Bibl."), utilizing the investigations of Mommsen, demonstrates that Josephus actually knew some of this material and introduced it at a later point in his work ("Ant." xiv. 8, § 5), in describing the history of Hyrcanus II. From all of this, it seems highly probable that the First Book of the Maccabees has retained its original form.

J. D. Michaelis insists that Josephus used the Hebrew original of the book, which differed in some important particulars from the present Greek text. Destinon ("Die Quellen des Josephus," 1882) revived this theory and endeavored to prove (pages 80 and following) that chapters 14-16 were not contained in the edition used by Josephus. Destinon bases his argument on the fact that Josephus treats these chapters very sparsely in comparison with his treatment of the other material of the same book, although these chapters contain just as much material and just as interesting. Wellhausen ("I. J. G." pages 222 and following) follows him. But Torrey (in "Encyc. Bibl."), utilizing the investigations of Mommsen, demonstrates that Josephus actually knew some of this material and introduced it at a later point in his work ("Ant." xiv. 8, § 5), in describing the history of Hyrcanus II. From all of this, it seems highly probable that the First Book of the Maccabees has retained its original form.

 

The doctrine expressed is the traditional belief of Israel, without the newer developments which appear in 2 Maccabees and Daniel. Unlike the Second Book of Maccabees, there is no doctrine of individual immortality except in the survival of one’s name and fame, nor does the book express any messianic expectation, though messianic images are applied historically to "the days of Simon" (1 Mc 14:4–17). In true Deuteronomic tradition, the author insists on fidelity to the law as the expression of Israel’s love for God. The contest which he describes is a struggle, not simply between Jew and Gentile, but between those who would uphold the law and those, Jews or Gentiles, who would destroy it. His severest condemnation goes, not to the Seleucid politicians, but to the lawless apostates among the people of Israel, who have been uniquely chosen by the one true God as a covenant-people, and they alone have been privileged to know and worship God, their eternal benefactor and unfailing source of help. The people for their part must worship the Lord alone and observe exactly the precepts of the holy law He has given to them. There is some slight evidence of an awareness of the [[Oral Torah]] in the book (1 Maccabees

 

 

 

There are seven poetic sections in the book that imitate the style of classical Hebrew poetry: four laments (1:25–28, 36–40; 2:7–13; 3:45), and three hymns of praise of “our fathers” (2:51–64), of Judas (3:3–9), and of Simon (14:4–15). The doctrine expressed in the book is the customary belief of Israel, without the new developments which appear in 2 Maccabees and Daniel. The people of Israel have been specially chosen by the one true God as covenant-partner, and they alone are privileged to know and worship God, their eternal benefactor and unfailing source of help. The people, in turn, must worship the Lord alone and observe exactly the precepts of the law given to them. The rededication of the Jerusalem Temple described in 4:36–59 (see 2 Mc 10:1–8) is the origin of the Jewish feast of Hanukkah.

 

Unlike the Second Book of Maccabees, there is no doctrine of individual immortality except in the survival of one’s name and fame, nor does the book express any messianic expectation, though messianic images are applied historically to "the days of Simon" (1 Mc 14:4–17). In true Deuteronomic tradition, the author insists on fidelity to the law as the expression of Israel’s love for God. The contest which he describes is a struggle, not simply between Jew and Gentile, but between those who would uphold the law and those, Jews or Gentiles, who would destroy it. His severest condemnation goes, not to the Seleucid politicians, but to the lawless apostates among

 

First Maccabees covers a period of a little over forty years in Jewish history, beginning with the accession of King Antiochus IV to the Seleucid throne in 175 B.C. The book is a ``dynastic history'' that concentrates on the exploits of one priestly family-Mattathias; his sons Judas Maccabeus, Jonathan, Simon, John, and Eleazar; and Simon's son John Hyrcanus. Mattathias's sons, known collectively as the Maccabees, rescued the Jerusalem temple from pagan hands and eventually gained political independence for the Jews. They founded the Hasmonean dynasty1, which provided political and spiritual leadership for Israel for about a century.

 

First Maccabees was written by a supporter of the Hasmoneans. The book's ending implies that it was completed sometime after the end of John Hyrcanus's reign in 104 B.C. On the other hand, since it speaks of the Romans in favorable-even idealistic-terms (see I Macc. 8:1-16), it was certainly written before 63 B.C., when a Roman takeover of Jerusalem ended Hasmonean rule.

 

The author of First Maccabees probably lived in the Holy Land, since he was very familiar with the geography of the region and had access to official documents that would have been archived in Jerusalem. Although there are no surviving Hebrew manuscripts of the book, scholars agree that it was originally written in Hebrew and subsequently translated into Greek. 2 According to Dr. David A. deSilva [1, p. 247], "Translating the book back into Hebrew offers relatively few challenges and has been used to clear up difficulties in the Greek text, a fact that weighs heavily in favor of a Hebrew original standing behind the Septuagint tradition."

 

==References==

==References==