18.07.2013 Views

historical perspectives: from the hasmoneans to bar kokhba in light ...

historical perspectives: from the hasmoneans to bar kokhba in light ...

historical perspectives: from the hasmoneans to bar kokhba in light ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

50 DANIEL R. SCHWARTZ<br />

with <strong>the</strong> Temple; Antiochus is said only <strong>to</strong> have ga<strong>in</strong>ed control of<br />

<strong>the</strong> city, killed many of his opponents <strong>in</strong> it, robbed, and departed.<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> second <strong>in</strong>vasion, <strong>in</strong> contrast, Antiochus massacred <strong>the</strong><br />

general population, not just his opponents, and looted <strong>the</strong> Temple.<br />

This reconstruction is more plausible than 1 Maccabees 1, as noted,<br />

because it doesn't require us <strong>to</strong> believe that <strong>the</strong> Jews twiddled <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

thumbs until "two years of days" after a major attack on <strong>the</strong> Temple<br />

and removal of its central appurtenances.<br />

If we wonder why, given his usual dependence upon 1 Maccabees, 10<br />

Josephus departed seriously <strong>from</strong> its version of events here, or, more<br />

precisely, why he <strong>in</strong>serted <strong>the</strong> Temple robbery details of 1 Macc.<br />

1:21-23 <strong>in</strong><strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> chronological context of Antiochus' second visit, it<br />

is difficult <strong>to</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d an answer. It is enough for us <strong>to</strong> surmise that he<br />

must have thought he had a good reason <strong>to</strong> do so. Ei<strong>the</strong>r his text<br />

of 1 Maccabees differed <strong>from</strong> ours or he was sure, ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>from</strong> his<br />

own research or <strong>from</strong> traditions <strong>to</strong> which Jerusalemites like him may<br />

have had access, that <strong>the</strong> order was as he presented it. In any case,<br />

it does not seem that Josephus knew of or used 2 Maccabees, although<br />

it is possible that <strong>the</strong>y had some <strong>in</strong>direct relationship.<br />

So far, <strong>the</strong>n, I have argued that it is likely that Antiochus twice<br />

visited Jerusalem and each time committed robbery; that, contrary<br />

<strong>to</strong> 1 Maccabees, it is unlikely that he robbed <strong>the</strong> Temple <strong>the</strong> first time;<br />

and that this reconstruction is supported not only by <strong>his<strong>to</strong>rical</strong> probabilities<br />

but also by Daniel and Josephus. I now turn <strong>to</strong> 4Q248.<br />

This short text, conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g ten fragmentary l<strong>in</strong>es, refers <strong>to</strong> a k<strong>in</strong>g<br />

who was (ruled?) <strong>in</strong> Egypt and "Greece" (whatever that means) and<br />

who conducted a siege. After <strong>the</strong> siege, "he came <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> Temple<br />

City ( ) and <strong>to</strong>ok it with all. . .;" <strong>the</strong>n he "turned around<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> lands of Gentiles and returned <strong>to</strong> Egypt. ..."<br />

This text, as Broshi and Eshel saw, apparently refers <strong>to</strong> Antiochus'<br />

two Egyptian campaigns. The text <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>es 6-8, which we just quoted<br />

<strong>in</strong> translation, is fairly complete:<br />

10 See I. M. Gafni, "Josephus and 1 Maccabees," <strong>in</strong> Josephus, <strong>the</strong> Bible, and His<strong>to</strong>ry,<br />

ed. L. H. Feldman and G. Hata (Detroit: Wayne State, 1989), 116-31; L. H.<br />

Feldman, "Josephus' Portrayal of <strong>the</strong> Hasmoneans Compared with 1 Maccabees,"<br />

<strong>in</strong> Josephus and <strong>the</strong> His<strong>to</strong>ry of <strong>the</strong> Greco-Roman Period: Essays <strong>in</strong> Memory of Mor<strong>to</strong>n Smith,<br />

ed. F. Parente and J. Sievers, Studia Post-Biblica 41 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994),<br />

41—68 — Studies <strong>in</strong> Hellenistic Judaism, Arbeiten zur Geschichte und Literatur des<br />

antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 30 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996), 137-63.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!