¹ Preserved apud Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica 6. 25.2.

² In the same passage Estienne “corrects” the manuscript readings on the basis of the masoretic vocalization which was unknown to Origen; e.g., σεϕερ and Ιεεζκηλ. replace the manuscript readings σϕαρ and Ιεζεκιηλ.

³ Geiger, Abraham, Urschrift and Ubersetzungen der Bibel (2d ed.; Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Madda, 1928) 204–05Google Scholar; Sachs, S., “Le titre du livre des Macchabées,” REJ 26 (1893) 161–66Google Scholar.

⁴ “Sphar” is the Syriac and Biblical Aramaic vocalization of spr and appears in Origen's list in the Hebrew title of psalms (Spharthelleim). “Sabanai” for “sarbanai” is probably a case of phonetic spelling. Origen's informants in Caesarea may well have left r unpronounced when it closed a syllable, as did the scribes of Qumran and Babylonian Jews. Qumran manuscripts frequently omit resh altogether in such cases or have it as a suspended letter; e.g., 1 Q Isa^a 19:6, 23:6, 29:16, 36:2, 39:8, 53:8, 63:8; HQPs^a 27:9; IQM 5:3–4; 6:5 and 9; 14:10. See Kutscher, E. Y., The Language and Linguistic Background of the Isaiah Scroll (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1959) 423Google Scholar (in Hebrew). On Babylonian Jewish Aramaic, see Epstein, J. N., A Grammar of Babylonian Aramaic (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1960) 19Google Scholar (in Hebrew). It is also possible that a learned but uncomprehending scribe omitted the rho and connected the mysterious word with the name Sabannaious at 1 Esdr 9:33 or with Sabanei at 2 Esdr 20:4 (Neh 10:5) or with Sabania at 2 Esdr 20:10 (Neh 10:11). Abel, p. v, objects that Hebrew ˒l should be represented in Greek by ηλ, not by ɛλ, for that is the usual practice with theophoric names ending in -el. Manuscript M of Eusebius does read βασαναϊηλ, but the metathesis of consonants does not inspire confidence in the quantity of the last vowel. Hebrew ˒1 is rendered in Greek by ɛλ when unstressed, and similar words have epsilon even when stressed; see Sperber, A., Historical Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Leiden: Brill, 1966) 193Google Scholar. In Origen's time, the spelling -ηλ sounded like the English word “eel,” and Origen may have used the spelling -ɛλ to reflect more accurately the pronunciation of his informants. For Hebrew forms like sphar, see Gesenius’ Hebrevo Grammar (rev. Kautzsch, E.; 2d English ed., rev. A. E. Cowley; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910)Google Scholar section 93g (pp. 263, 266).

⁵ The root srb often has pejorative connotations. See Ezek 2:6; Targum to Ps 78:8, Deut 1:26, and 1 Sam 15:23.

⁶ See Chapter 4 in the introduction to my forthcoming commentary on First and Second Maccabees in the Anchor Apocrypha.

⁷ It is just possible that 1 Mac 2:67 plays upon the meaning of the name, for the Greek κδικεῖν renders the Hebrew root ryb at Judg 6:31. However, at 1 Mac 2:67 the verb occurs with the noun κδίκησις as a cognate accusative, and the noun in the Greek Bible never renders a derivative of the Hebrew root ryb, so that the Hebrew original of 1 Mac 2:67 probably had the Hebrew root nqm. Scholars have held that Hasmonaean interpolations are responsible for the importance of the clan of Yehoyarib in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Even if those scholars are right, by our author's time, the interpolations were scripture. For a defense of the Biblical texts exalting the clan of Yehoyarib, see Liver, Jacob, Chapters in the History of the Priests and Levites (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1968) 33–52Google Scholar (in Hebrew).

⁸ Absence from 1 Maccabees: cf. Niese, B., “Kritik der beiden Makkabäerbächer,” Hermes 35 (1900) 457–58Google Scholar. Josephus: BJ i. Prooem. 6. 19; AJ xi. 4. 8. 111; xx. 8. 11. 190, 10. 3. 238; Vita 1.4; cf. AJ xiv. 16. 4. 490–91, etc. Rabbinic sources: M. Middôt 1:6; Seder Ôlam Rabbâh 30, p. 142 Ratner; TB Shabbat 21b, Megillah ll a; Menahôt 28b; Sôtah 49b and parallels; Berêshît Rabbâh 99:2; Sôferîm 20:8; Midrash Tehillîm to Ps 30:3 and to Psalm 93, beginning; Targum to 1 Sam 2:4 and to Song of Sol. 6:7; and the prayer ‘Al Hannissîm. For the correct reading at TB Megillah lla, see Alon, Gedaliahu, Studies in Jewish History (2 vols.; Tel-Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1957–1958) 1. 24Google Scholar (in Hebrew).

⁹ E.g., the prayer 'Al hannissîm. I shall argue elsewhere for its probable early date.

¹⁰ See my forthcoming commentary to 1 Mac 2:1–5. In ‘Al hannissîm Mattathias appears as “Mattathias, son of Yohanan,... priest, Hashmonay.” The style of Alexander Balas at 1 Mac 10:1 follows a similar scheme (name, patronymic, epithet), as do the styles of Ptolemies III and V (see Preisigke, Friedrich, Wärterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden [Berlin: Selbstverlag der Erben, 1925–1931] 3. 34Google Scholar, 36). Still closer is the scheme of the official name of a Roman citizen: praenomen-and-nomen, patronymic, tribe, and cognomen. The Romans, like Jewish priestly families, preferred to choose their names from a very small list, and avoided the danger of confusion of two men with the same name by the wide use of nicknames (cognomina). Josephus nowhere states that “Hashmonay” was Mattathias’ nickname and may have been ignorant of the fact. On the other hand, he may well be correct in stating that Mattathias’ grandfather Simeon (or, less likely, his great-grandfather) bore the nickname; see AJ xii. 6. 1. 265. Giving the grandson the name of the grandfather was common. Josephus erred in naming Mattathias’ father as Hashmonay at BJ i. 1. 3. 36, and at AJ loc. cit. he corrected his error. On the other hand, the Byzantine writer Georgius Syncellus correctly states that ˒Ασαμωναῖος was Mattathias’ nickname (Eklogê chronographias 543 Dindorf).

¹¹ Roman: e.g., Nasica and Naso (“big-nosed”); Dalman and Perles suggested that “Maccabaeus” means “hammer-headed”; see Abel, F. M., Les Livres des Maccabées (2d ed.; Paris: Gabalda, 1949)Google Scholar ii-iii.

¹² There is no evidence to tell us how obscure or how distinguished Mattathias’ family was before. If it was obscure, one may compare the example of Augustus, who avoided use of the name “Octavianus,” which recalled his relatively obscure origins.

¹³ yryb means “enemy” at Isa 49:25; Jer 18:19; Hos 10:6; Ps 35:1.

¹⁴ TP Ta ‘anît 4:2, p. 68a.

¹⁵ See Bacher, W., Die Agada der Palästinensischen Amoräer (Hildesheim: Olms, 1965) 3. 348–50Google Scholar.

¹⁶ TP Ta 'anît 4:5, p. 68d.

¹⁷ The consonantal text is msrbyy. The doubled y is anomalous; cf. Kutscher, E. Y., “Studies in Galilean Aramaic,” Tarbiz 21–23 (1952) 28–33Google Scholar (in Hebrew). Nevertheless, it is confirmed by the rhyme -bay in an early liturgical poem; see Fleischer, Ezra, ”Piyyût leyannay hazzan ‘al mishmarôt ha-kôhanîm” Sinai 64 (5729 = 1968–1969) 184Google Scholar. In a letter of September 2, 1970, E. Y. Kutscher suggests to me that the spelling of the name in the Palestinian Talmud and in the poems based on it is distorted to fit R. Levi's pun, for in Galilean Aramaic, as in the Christian Aramaic of Palestine and in the Elephantine papyri, the absolute state of the word for “house” is bay, even though the emphatic state is baytâ. See Kutscher, , “The Hermopolis Papyri,” Israel Oriental Studies 1 (1971) 116Google Scholar and n. 45. If his suggestion is correct, the original epithet may have been the normal plural emphatic state, msrby', “the resisters,” or even srbny'. Unfortunately, not one of the fragments on stone (below, n. 18) preserves the name. In any case, srbny' and msrby’ are synonyms derived from the same root.

¹⁸ Some of the “nicknames” are derived from the names of families within the courses. See Liver, Chapters in the History of the Priests and Levites 47 (in Hebrew). Inscription: Avi-Yonah, M., “The Caesarea Inscription of the 24 Priestly Courses,” Eretz-Israel 7 (1964) 24–28Google Scholar (in Hebrew) with bibliography of the relevant literature.

¹⁹ “Yehoyarib” could be twisted to give a bad meaning only by an enemy. The root srb, however, added only one consonant to the root of “Yehoyarib” and had generally bad connotations.

²⁰ “Tory” and “Whig” originated as derogatory nicknames given by opponents.

²¹ On hostility to the clan of Yehoyarib in rabbinic tradition, see Geiger, Urschrift, 204–05; Lieberman, Saul, Tôseftâ Ki-Fsûtah (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 5715 [1955])Google Scholar, Part V (Mô˓ed) 1076–77, 1115, and compare the lot of Menelaus’ clan of Bilgah, ibid., Part IV (Mô˓ed) 908–10 (in Hebrew).