Victor L. Parker, «Judas Maccabaeus' Campaigns against Timothy», Vol. 87 (2006) 457-476
Both 1 and 2 Maccabees mention various campaigns of Judas Maccabaeus against
an opponent called Timothy. The author argues that although 1 Maccabees in
several instances does provide more accurate detail, 2 Maccabees’ presentation
of these campaigns as chronologically discrete has the greater historical
plausibility. Additionally, 2 Maccabees alone preserves a record of a third,
historically plausible campaign against Timothy. Overall, 2 Maccabees deserves
more esteem as an historical source than it commonly receives.
464 Victor L. Parker
sequence (28). Diodorus of Sicily created similar confusion in his
abridgement of Ephorus (29), so this assumption would not stand
without parallel. Yet we should, as I have argued elsewhere, hesitate to
impute the carefree incoherence of a Diodorus to this particular
Epitomator who seems to have removed internal contradictions in his
work wherever he noticed them (30).
Second, one might argue that the account at 2 Macc 10,24-38 has
come to stand before the account at 2 Macc 12,10-31 only through a
clumsy transposition in our text (31): originally, the former account had
stood after the latter with Timothy’s death at the end of the sequence.
Yet, provided that 1 Macc 5,6-8 correspond to 2 Macc 10,24-38, then
1 Maccabees presents these two campaigns in the same order. As many
have noted, 1 and 2 Maccabees show substantial overlap in material
and, often, even in phrasing; and where they have this overlap we
should assume that, ultimately, they depend on the same source
material (32). Conventionally, we should assume that the ordering of
these two campaigns belonged to the two books’ source(s).
This brings us to a third possible solution which, by contrast, does
merit serious consideration: the campaign at 2 Macc 10,24-38 is
different from that at 1 Macc 5,6-8; and the Timothy involved at 2
Macc 10,24-38 is a different man from the one in 2 Macc 12,10-31 (33).
One detail supports this solution: in 2 Macc 10,24-38 the town which
Judas sacks at the end is Gazara; in 1 Macc 5,6-8 it is Jazer (34).
(28) Ibid., 512, suggests something similar in his arguments on how the
episode at 2 Macc 8,30-32 has come to stand where it now does.
(29) Diodorus, 12.35.4 has King Archidamus of Sparta die in the year
434/433; yet Archidamus still invades Attica in 431-430 according to 12.42.6.
(30) PARKER, Campaigns (in press).
(31) MEYER, Ursprung, 459; F.-M. ABEL, Les Livres des Maccabées (Paris
1949) 416. Cf. also SCHUNK, Quellen, 112-114; M. ZAMBELLI, “La composizione
del secondo libro dei Maccabei e la nuova cronologia di Antioco IV Epiphaneâ€,
Miscellanea Greca e Romana (Rome 1965) 277-278; C. HABICHT, “2.
Makkabäerbuchâ€, Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit (Gütersloh
1979) I.3, 250-251 note “a†to verse 11.
(32) See (e.g.) GOLDSTEIN, 2 Maccabees, 28-49; KOLBE, Beiträge, 124-136; cf.
SIEVERS, Hasmoneans, 52-56.
(33) Thus D.A. SCHLATTER, Jason von Kyrene (Munich 1893) 23; KUGLER,
Moses, 372-373; H. BEVENOT, Die beiden Makkabäerbücher (Bonn 1931) 227
(though he is not explicit on the point); SCHUNK, Quellen, 111. J. REGNER,
“Timotheus, 8â€, RE (1937) VI, 1330-1331; A. BÃœCHLER, Tobiaden und Oniaden
(Wien 1899) 301, n. 14; 321, n. 24; and 323-324.
(34) See esp. KUGLER, Moses, 373.