2 Maccabees
2 Maccabees,[note 1] also known as the Second Book of Maccabees, Second Maccabees, and abbreviated as 2 Macc., is a deuterocanonical book which recounts the persecution of Jews under King Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabean Revolt against him. It concludes with the defeat of the Seleucid Empire general Nicanor in 161 BC by Judas Maccabeus, the leader of the Maccabees.
2 Maccabees was originally written in Koine Greek by an unknown diaspora Jew living in Hellenistic Egypt. It was likely written some time between 150 and 100 BC. Together with the book 1 Maccabees, it is one of the most important sources on the Maccabean Revolt. The work is not a sequel to 1 Maccabees but rather its own independent rendition of the historical events of the Maccabean Revolt. It both starts and ends its history earlier than 1 Maccabees, starting with an incident with the Seleucid official Heliodorus attempting to tax the Second Temple in 178 BC, and ending with the Battle of Adasa in 161 BC. Some scholars believe the book to be influenced by the Pharisaic tradition, with sections that include an endorsement of prayer for the dead and a resurrection of the dead.
The book, like the other Books of the Maccabees, was included in the Septuagint, a prominent Greek collection of Jewish scripture. It was not promptly translated to Hebrew nor included in the Masoretic Hebrew canon, the Tanakh. While possibly read by Greek-speaking Jews in the two centuries after its creation, later Jews did not consider the work canonical nor important. Early Christians did honor the work, and it was included as a deuterocanonical work of the Old Testament. Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox Christians still consider the work deuterocanonical; Protestant Christians do not regard 2 Maccabees as canonical, although many include 2 Maccabees as part of the biblical apocrypha, noncanonical books useful for the purpose of edification.
Authorship and composition date[edit]
The author of 2 Maccabees is not identified, but he claims to be abridging a 5-volume work by Jason of Cyrene.[1][note 2] This longer work is not preserved, and it is uncertain how much of the present text of 2 Maccabees is copied from Jason's work. The author wrote in Greek, as there is no particular evidence of an earlier Hebrew version. A few sections of the book, such as the Preface, Epilogue, and some reflections on morality are generally assumed to come from the author, not from Jason. Scholars disagree on both when Jason's work was written and when 2 Maccabees was written. Many scholars argue that Jason's work was likely published by a contemporary of the Maccabean Revolt, around 160–140 BCE, although all that is known for sure is that it was before 2 Maccabees.[2] Scholars suggest 2 Maccabees was composed at some point from 150–100 BC.[note 3] It is generally considered that the work must have been written no later than the 70s BC, given that the author seems unaware that Pompey would defeat the Hasmonean kingdom and make Judea a Roman protectorate in 63 BC.[2] The work was possibly modified some after creation, but reached its final form in the Septuagint, the Greek Jewish scriptures. The Septuagint version also gave the work its title of "2 Maccabees" to distinguish it from the other books of the Maccabees in it; the original title of the work, if any, is unknown.
The author appears to be an Egyptian Jew, possibly writing from the capital in Alexandria, addressing other diaspora Jews.[6][2][note 4] The Greek style of the writer is educated and erudite, and he is familiar with the forms of rhetoric and argument of the era. The beginning of the book includes two letters sent by Jews in Jerusalem to Jews of the diaspora in Hellenistic Egypt encouraging celebration of the feast day set up to honor the purification of the temple (Hanukkah). If the author of the book inserted these letters, the book would have to have been written after 188 SE (~124 BC), the date of the second letter. Some commentators hold that these letters were a later addition, while others consider them the basis for the work.[note 5]
Reliability as history[edit]
2 Maccabees has traditionally been considered a somewhat lesser source on the history of the Maccabean Revolt than 1 Maccabees by secular historians, especially in the 19th century. This is for a number of reasons: it wears its religious moralizing openly; it skips around in time and place at parts, rather than the chronological approach in 1 Maccabees; and it includes a number of implausible claims directly in contention with 1 Maccabees.[21] In general, most scholars continue to agree that 1 Maccabees is a superior source on the military history of the revolt: it was written by a Judean who names and describes locations accurately compared to the occasional geographic blunders of 2 Maccabees written by an Egyptian, includes far more details on maneuvers and tactics than the simple depictions of battle in 2 Maccabees, and its figures for elements such as troop counts and casualties are considered more reliable than the wildly inflated numbers in 2 Maccabees. (For example, 2 Maccabees implausibly claims that there were 35,000 Syrian casualties at the Battle of Adasa, a number likely far larger than the entire Seleucid force.[67]) 2 Maccabees was also written in a "pathetic" in the sense of pathos style, appealing to emotions and sentiment.[68] Skeptical historians considered this a sign that the epitomist was not interested in historical accuracy much, but merely telling a good story.[7][69]
In the 20th century, there was a renewed interest in rehabilitating 2 Maccabees as a source on par with 1 Maccabees by scholars. In particular, there was a growing recognition that a politically slanted history, as 1 Maccabees is, could be just as biased and unreliable as the religiously slanted history that 2 Maccabees is.[70] A deeply devout observer could still be describing true events, albeit with a religious interpretation of them. By the 1930s, historians generally came to the conclusion that the historical documents present in 2 Maccabees - while seemingly out of chronological order - were likely legitimate and matched what would be expected of such Seleucid negotiations.[69] Archaeological evidence supported many of the references made to Seleucid leadership, causing historians to think that Jason and the epitomist must have had better knowledge of internal Seleucid affairs than the author of 1 Maccabees.[71] As an example, 2 Maccabees appears to be more reliable and honest on the date of the death of Antiochus IV. Archaeological evidence supports the claim in 2 Maccabees he died before the cleansing of the Temple, while 1 Maccabees moves his death later to hide the fact that Lysias abandoned his campaign in Judea not due to the efforts of the Maccabees at the Battle of Beth Zur, but rather to respond to political turmoil resulting from Antiochus's death. 2 Maccabees writes that Antiochus's decrees were targeted against Judea and Samaria, which historians find more likely than the claim in 1 Maccabees that he demanded religious standardization across the entire empire.[72]
Even to the extent that 2 Maccabees is still distrusted as history to a degree, the fact that it is a genuinely independent source is considered invaluable to historians. Many events in the Hellenistic and Roman periods have only passing mentions that they occurred; those that do have a detailed source often only have a single such detailed source, leaving it difficult to determine that author's biases or errors. For example, the Great Revolt against the Romans in 64–73 AD is only closely recorded by Josephus's The Jewish War. The Maccabean Revolt having two independent detailed contemporary histories is a rarity.
Manuscripts[edit]
Early manuscripts of the Septuagint were not uniform in their lists of books.[73] 2 Maccabees is found in the 5th century Codex Alexandrinus which includes all of 1, 2, 3, and 4 Maccabees, as well as the 8th century Codex Venetus. 2 Maccabees is missing from the Codex Vaticanus (which lacks any of the books of Maccabees) and the Codex Sinaiticus (which includes 1 and 4 Maccabees, but neither 2 nor 3 Maccabees). Additionally, other ancient fragments have been found, albeit with some attributed to Lucian of Antioch who is considered to have "improved" some of his renditions with unknown other material, leading to variant readings. Pre-modern Latin, Syriac, and Armenian translations exist, as well as a fragment in Akhmimic Coptic, but they mostly match the Greek, or the Lucianic renditions of the Greek in the case of the Syriac versions.[74] Robert Hanhart created a critical edition of the Greek text in 1959 with a second edition published in 1976.[75][74]
