The Composition of II Maccabees 567 The key to unravelling this passage is in understanding our author’s opinion of the Antiochenes. This is provided earlier in the chapter, where we have an account of how Jason procured through bribery the priesthood (2 Macc 4,7-8), then introduced societal changes into Jerusalem (such as a gymnasium and an ephebic education) and registered ‘those who were Antiochenes in Jeruselem’ (2 Macc 4,7-17); presumably he drew up a list of those who were to be awarded this new status (11). What is important is that our author reacts negatively to these changes. They are described as undermining the priests’ desire to preform their religious duties and influencing them to discard traditional Jewish laws and customs. The result is summed up in the clearest terms: to transgress in such a way, acting profanely against God’s laws, would have consequences: the Lord would discipline His people (12).We must incorporate this understanding to our interpretation of events in Tyre: The impropriety of Jason’s offering is emphasised in that the Antiochenes — a group central to the problematic societal changes in Jerusalem — even they question whether it is right to give 300 drachmas as a sacrifice to Herakles. Support from an unlikely group (in this case the Antiochenes, previously the Scythians) is used to emphasise a point: here, disgust at idol worship. The topos, therefore, is relatively simple and tends to turn on the emphatic kaiv. Nevertheless there are layers of complexity. First, not every use of the emphatic kaiv marks our topos (13), and conversely (as will become apparent) the emphasis of a point through the development of an improbable scenario does not depend on the presence of the emphatic kaiv; albeit that the comparative emphasis inherent to the term ‘even’ remains. Second, context is demonstratively important: our author’s opinion of the Antiochenes (above) makes the topos apparent, and without that understanding the passage can be read in an entirely different way. This recognition is brought into sharp focus when considering some of the other uses our author makes of this construction: recognising the topos changes a commonly accepted inter- pretation of several passages. Consider the description of the murder of (11) There is considerable debate as to who the Antiochenes were and what our author actually means here; see e.g. J. GOLDSTEIN, I Maccabees (AB 41; Garden City, NY 1976) 110-122; GOLDSTEIN, II Maccabees, 227; V.A. TCHERIKOVER, Hellenistic Civilisation and the Jews (Philadelphia, PA 1959) 161-163, 404-409; SCHÜRER, History of the Jewish People I, 148. Regardless, what we are concerned with is our author’s opinion of this group: what they are responsible for makes his hostility clear. (12) Note 2 Macc 4,17 and the description of events following which fulfil the promise made here. The authorial insertion at 2 Macc 6,12-17 is also of interest. (13) In part this could be due to individual interpretation in translations, e.g. compare Goldstein and NRSV versions of 2 Macc 6,23; or it could be due to our author copying a section into the text and not editing it — such as a story, again cf. 2 Macc 6,23 (“The martyrdom of Eleazar”: 2 Macc 6,18-31). A sophisticated author will also use language to his best advantage, so a specific literary construction (our topos) may not be appropriate every time an identified term (i.e. emphatic kaiv) appears; or the construct may be uncertain. So 2 Macc 4,3: “When his hatred progressed to such a degree that even murders were committed by one of Simon’s approved agents” th'" de; e[cqra" ejpi; tosou'ton probainouvsh" w{ste kai; diav tino" tw'n uJpo; tou' Simwno" dedokimasmevnwn fovnou" suntelei'sqai. Were the murders committed or are they a stereotypical exaggeration to further condemn Simon’s character? Either way, to foreshadow a later discussion, the same hand that developed our topos is likely responsible for this phrase as there is similarity in construction.