The first book of Maccabees gives a detailed account of the Hasmonean rise to power within the administrative structures of the declining Seleucid Empire. While this picture is altogether plausible as far as the Hasmoneans are concerned, there are obvious holes in the narrative when it comes to rival claims. All opponents are characterized as “lawless” and “impious men.” There are nevertheless some indications that other parties had similar access to Seleucid pretenders, and that the Hasmoneans constantly had to face opposition from groups quite similar to themselves. The article tries to identify some of these groups. It also considers the repercussions this rivalry had in the post-Seleucid Hasmonean state.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Benedictus Niese, “Kritik der beiden Makkabäerbücher nebst Beiträgen zur Geschichte der makkabäischen Erhebung,” Hermes 35 (1900): 268-307 and 453-527, esp. 456-60; Joseph Sievers, The Hasmoneans and Their Supporters: From Mattathias to the Death of John Hyrcanus i, sfshj 6 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 36; Othmar Keel, “1 Makk 2. Rechtfertigung, Programm und Denkmal für die Erhebung der Hasmonäer,” in Hellenismus und Judentum: Vier Studien zu Daniel 7 und zur Religionsnot unter Antiochos iv, obo 178 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), 123-33.
Katell Berthelot, “Judas Maccabeus’ Wars against Judaea’s Neighbours in 1 Maccabees 5: A Reassessment of the Evidence,” Electrum 21 (2014): 73-85.
Uriel Rappaport, “The Conversion of the Edomites in the Days of John Hyrcanus,” in Israel’s Land: Papers Presented to Israel Shatzman on his Jubilee, ed. Joseph Geiger, Hannah M. Cotton, and Guy D. Stiebel (Raana: The Open University Press, 2009), 59-74, esp. 71-72 [Hebrew].
Thus Dąbrowa, Hasmoneans, 61; but cf. 63 n. 72, where he argues that Ptolemy’s wealth may have come from the dowry he received when marrying Simon’s daughter, as suggested by 1 Macc 16:11: ἦν γὰρ γαμβρὸς τοῦ ἀρχιερέως.
Ehud Netzer, The Palaces of the Hasmoneans and Herod the Great (Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2001), 13-39.
See Dąbrowa, Hasmoneans, 67. According to 1 Macc 16:19-20, Ptolemy involved a number of people, including military commanders, in his plan. Babota, Institution, 264 holds that Ptolemy cooperated with Hellenizing priests in Jerusalem, but his arguments (that according to 1 Macc 16:20 he sent men to conquer “Jerusalem and the temple mount,” while Josephus, A.J. 13.229, has “the people,” not the priests, turn against him) are insufficient.
Josephus, A.J. 13.356. The campaign would appear even more purpose-driven if the Gadara in question was not the Gadara of the Decapolis, but the one in Peraea, as has been argued by Meron M. Piotrkowski, “When Did Alexander Yannai Capture Which Gadara?” jsq 18 (2011): 266-76. However, one wonders about the necessity of a 10-month siege if the much smaller Gadara was meant, and the new inscription that mentions a Philotas as ruler (?) of Decapolitan Gadara in 85/4 (seg 58.1756 with the latest supplements) does not at all exclude the city’s integration into Jannaeus’s kingdom, as Piotrkowski and others assume. The supposed irrationality of the route taken by Jannaeus (Piotrkowski, “When did Alexander Yannai,” 275) vanishes if we deduce from Josephus’s εὐθύς that he started his campaign from Scythopolis, not from Jerusalem.
Josephus, A.J. 13.379. Josephus obviously did not know any details. Stern, “Judaea and her Neighbors,” 43-44 argues that Demetrius’s general position in the Seleucid throne war was too weak to concentrate on Judea any longer.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 436 | 55 | 10 |
Full Text Views | 318 | 8 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 219 | 26 | 4 |
The first book of Maccabees gives a detailed account of the Hasmonean rise to power within the administrative structures of the declining Seleucid Empire. While this picture is altogether plausible as far as the Hasmoneans are concerned, there are obvious holes in the narrative when it comes to rival claims. All opponents are characterized as “lawless” and “impious men.” There are nevertheless some indications that other parties had similar access to Seleucid pretenders, and that the Hasmoneans constantly had to face opposition from groups quite similar to themselves. The article tries to identify some of these groups. It also considers the repercussions this rivalry had in the post-Seleucid Hasmonean state.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 436 | 55 | 10 |
Full Text Views | 318 | 8 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 219 | 26 | 4 |