As to the Ueh. Mef/illath Aniiochiis (O^I^UiX r35"2) still existing, which was first published in the editions of the Pentateuch of 1491 and 1505 along -with the oth- er MegiUoth ; is given in the Spanish and Italian Kitual for the Festivals (C"iTlTn^) of 1555-50, etc.; is insert- ed, with a Latin translation, in Bartolocci's Billiotkeca Magna Rahbinica, i, 383 ; is printed separately, without the translation (Berlin, 1700) ; and which has recently been reiniblished by Jelliiiek in his Bdh Ila-Midrash, i, 142-140— this simply gives a few of the incidents of the Maccabajan wars, and makes John, the high-priest who it says slew Nicanor in the Temple, play the most conspicuous part. It tells us that Antiochus began per- secuting the Jews in the 23d year of his reign and 213th after the building of the second Temple ; and that the descendants of the Maccabees, who crushed the armies of this tyrant, ruled over Israel 200 years, thus folloAv- ing the chronology of the Talmud (comp. ,4 Jorfa Zara, 9 a; Seek?- Olam iSutfa ; De Rossi, J/eo/- Enajim, c. xxvi; Zunz, Gottesdienst.Vortrage, p. 134). That the Aramaic (Chaldee), which was for the first time published by Filipowski, together with the Hebrew and an English version (London, 1851), is the original, and that the He- brew is a translation, may be seen from a most cursory comparison of the two texts. The Hebrew version slavishly imitates the phrases of the Aramaic original instead of giving the Hebrew idioms. Thus, for in- stance, the Chaldee XTi'liJ 112 is rendered in the He- brew version by ri"ll' nriXS, instead of K'^ntl r"3; ',ibxb -jibx by Tlbi<b nbx, instead of linx ^X IT-^X or 111""! ?X UJ'^X, etc. It is perfectly astonishing that this document, which was evidently got up about the 7th century of the Christian a'ra, to be recited on the Feast of Dedication in commemoration of the Macca- ba;an victories over the enemies of Israel, should be re- garded by Ilengstenberg {Genuineness of Daniel, English transl., p. 237) as the identical " Chaldee copy of the first book of Maccabees to which Origen and Jerome refer." Hengstenberg, moreover, most blunderingly calls the Hehreio version published \\^' Bartolocci the Chaldee.
The date and person of the Greek translator of the first book of Maccabees are wholly undetermined, but it is imlikely that such a book woulil remain long un- known or untranslated at Alcx;andria.
V. Canonicity and Importance of the Book. — This book never formed a jiart of the Jewish canon, and is ex- cluded from the canon of sacred books in tlie catalogues of Melito, Origen, the Council of Laodicea, St. Cyril, St. Hilary, St. Athanasius, St. Jerome, etc. In the Chron- icle of Eusebius it is put in the same category as the writings of Josephus and Africanus, so as to distinguish it from the inspired writings. Still the book is cited with high respect, and as conducive to the edification of the Church, at a very early period (August. De Cicit, Dei, lib. xviii, c. 30). Tiie councils at Hippo and Car- thage (A.D. 393 and 397) first formally received it into the canon, and in modern times the Council of Trent has settled for the Catholic Church all disputes about its canonical authority by putting it mto the catalogue of inspired Scripture.
But, though the Protestant Church rejects the decis- ions of these councils, and abides by the ancient Jewish canon, yet both the leaders of the Keformation and modern expositors rightly attach great importance to this book. The great value of it will be duly appreci- ated when it is remembered that it is one of the very few suri'iving records of the most important, but very obscure period of Jewish history between the close of the O. T. and the beginning of the N. T. It is, there- fore, not to be wondered at that the far-seeing Luther remarks, in his introduction to the translation of this book — '■ This is another of those books not included in the Hebrew Scriptures, althougli in its discourses and description it almost equals the other sacred books of Scripture, and woidd not have been unworthy to be reckoned among them, because it is a very necessary and useful book for the understanding of the prophet Daniel in the eleventh chapter" {Vorrede aufdas erste Buck Maccabceoium, German Bible, ed. 1530). It is rath- er surprising that the Anglican Church has not pre- scribed anj^ lessons to be read from this book. A refer- ence to 1 Mace, iv, 59, however, is to be found in the margin of the A. V., John x, 22.
YI. Vei-sio7is and Literature. — The books of INIacca- bees were not included bj' Jerome in his translation of the Bible. " The first book," he says, " I found in He- brew" {Prol. Gal, in Reg.'), but he takes no notice of the Latin version, and certainly did not revise it. The ver- sion of the two books which has been incorporated in the Romish A'ulgate was consequently derived from the old Latin current before Jerome's time. This version was obviously made from the Greek, and in the main follows it closely. Besides the common text, Sabatier has published a version of a considerable part of the first book (cap. i-xiv, 1) from a very ancient Paris MS. (»S'. Germ. 15) in 1751, which exhibits an earlier form of the text. Angclo ]\Iai has also published a fragment of another Latin translation, comprising chap, ii, 49-04, which differs very materially from both texts {Spicile- gium Romanorum, ix, 00 S(i.). The old Syriac version given in the Paris and London Polyglots, and by De Lagarde, Libri Veteris Tesfamenti Ajiocri/phi Syriace (Loud. 1801), is, like the Latin, made literally from the Greek.