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.
Judas Maccabaeus’ Campaigns against Timothy 475
small, repetitive campaigns in and around Judaea ought to have
accompanied the rebellion throughout (67). Both arguments retain their
force and have yet to receive refutation. But we may adduce farther
ones.
First, it has puzzled scholars why Judas, after his defeat of Lysias
in 164 B.C., long before the campaigning season ended (68), should
have waited until December to purify the Temple. If we posit the
original arrangement of material in 2 Maccabees as correct, then an
answer immediately suggests itself: Judas still had seasonal campaigns
on his hands — against Timothy. In addition he still had to take
Jerusalem itself. The ingenuity expended by Goldstein in explaining
the long delay between Lysias’ defeat and the Purification may all be
in vain (69): Judas was busy fighting during those months, nothing
more.
Second, according to 2 Maccabees various campaigns against
neighbours preceded Lysias’ second invasion of Judaea. Curiously, 1
Maccabees presents this second invasion — which it places into the
150th year, i.e. in, regardless of which Seleucid era is meant, the
campaigning season of 162 B.C. (70): i.e. distinctly later than Antiochus
IV’s death (71) — as precipitated by the complaints which Jewish
renegades bring to Antiochus V’s court. Amongst other things these
renegades complain that Judas and his men have been attacking the
peoples on the borders of Judaea: kai; oujk ejf∆ hJma'" movnon ejxevteinan
cei'ra ajlla; kai; ejpi; pavnta ta; o{ria aujtw'n, “and they have been
attacking not just us, but all their neighbours too†(72). Repeated
——————
such overarching theme in its presentation of these events. The imposition of an
overarching theme may — as Niese suggests — have first required the bringing
together of all the campaigns. At any rate, while we can conclude that some
literary patterning of events has taken place in 1 Maccabees, we cannot safely
determine its limit.
(67) NIESE, Kritik, 471-472; cf. GALLING, Judäa, 46.
(68) Lysias’ breaking off of the campaign after becoming bogged down at
Beth Zur suggests that the campaign ended early (1 Macc 4,28-35; 2 Macc 11,1-
12).
(69) GOLDSTEIN, 1 Maccabees, 273-278.
(70) 1 Macc 6,20. (For the two Seleucid eras see BICKERMANN, Festbrief, 144).
(71) That is to say that despite 1 Maccabees’ apparent dating of the campaign
against the neighbours to before Antiochus IV’s death (1 Macc 5), such fighting
seems to have continued after the King’s death even according to the chronology
advanced by 1 Maccabees (faulty though it be: cf. PARKER, Campaigns [in press])
for Lysias’ second campaign.
(72) 1 Macc 6,25.