The Maccabees:
Heroes or Fanatics?
The Maccabees
triumphed over the Syrian Greeks and liberated the Temple, but their legacy is
not so clear.
By Michele Alperin
Although celebrated as heroes who saved Jewish practice and
Torah law from suppression and abrogation by the Syrian Greeks, the Maccabees
are portrayed in the First Book of Maccabees as religious zealots, murdering
coreligionists who had chosen the path of Hellenism.
The historical reality is murky, refracted as it is through
the political and religious agendas of First and Second Maccabees (books
relating the Hanukkah story that the rabbis chose not to include in the Hebrew
Bible). Because of this ambiguousness, both interpretations have some
legitimacy, and later commentators choose the one most consonant with their own
needs and goals. For example, readers who have personally experienced
anti-Semitism may identify Mattathias as a hero who was loyal to his religious
identity in the face of an anti-Semitic Greek civilization. On the other hand,
civil libertarians may judge the Maccabees less generously, criticizing their
infringement on the civil rights of their coreligionists [the latter of whom
may also have treated those belonging to the Maccabean party in a similar
manner].
The Role of
Hellenism
Central to any assessment of the Maccabees is an evaluation
of the role of Hellenism, an ideology whose universalistic outlook was based on
Greek ideas and athletic prowess. Following in the footsteps of Alexander the
Great, Hellenism became a political tool used by the Syrian Greeks to
consolidate their power among the wealthy bourgeoisie. In turn, the
aristocratic elites who embraced Hellenism gained access to the social and
economic perquisites flowing to citizens of a Greek polis, including the right to mint coins, to take part in
international Hellenistic events, and to receive protection from the city’s
founding ruler.
But Hellenism encompassed more than a pragmatic relationship
between the ruler and local economic elites; it also represented an
"enlightened" worldview considered by many to be the way of the future.
Nations who shut themselves off and did not confront the challenge of Hellenism
were falling by the wayside. Because it was viewed as the wave of the future,
the pressure to acculturate to Hellenism was quite intense in Judea. Therefore,
the people of Judea had to decide whether the universalistic focus of Hellenism
constituted a danger to their ancestral religion and its God or whether it
simply represented a more modern and "progressive" way of life that
could be merged with Jewish practice.
Reform or
Revolt
Was the appropriate response, then, to reform Judaism in the
spirit of Hellenism or to assume a stance protective of traditional Jewish
values by "liberating" Judea from the Syrian Greeks? The Jewish
Hellenists chose the first path; they wanted to move beyond separatism and
assimilate the positive aspects of Greek culture into Judaism. As First
Maccabees recounts, "In those days there emerged in Israel lawless men
[Jewish Hellenists] who persuaded many, saying, ‘Let us go and make a covenant
with the nations that are around us; for since we separated ourselves from
them, many evils have come upon us’" (I Maccabees 1:11).
Jewish Hellenists used the secular power structures for
their own benefit. First Jason and then Menelaus were able to secure the position
of High Priest from Antiochus IV Epiphanes by way of monetary bribes and other
machinations. Yet the involvement of these wealthy Jewish aristocrats and
priests in Hellenism complicates any assessment of the role of the Maccabees.
Whereas a liberator is generally one who frees a country from domination by a
foreign power, the Maccabees seem to have "liberated" the loyal
Jewish masses from the Hellenist Jews and their Syrian Greek allies in the
context of a civil war. An assessment of the legitimacy of the Maccabean
liberation, therefore, depends on whether the Hellenists are viewed as
apostates or as Jews who have taken on some Greek ways.
According to historian Elias Bickerman, Jason and Menelaus
wanted to preserve aspects of Judaism that fit with Greek ideals, like a
universal God, but to remove those parts of Jewish practice that separated Jews
from others: dietary laws, Sabbath observance, circumcision. Some Hellenists
continued to worship the Jewish God, but moved their worship to outdoor sanctuaries
and sanctioned the pig as a sacrificial animal. It is interesting, however,
that even in Second Maccabees, which is considered an anti-Hellenist tract,
envoys representing Jerusalem at the quinquennial games in Tyre [the ancient
version of the Olympics] "thought it improper" to purchase a
sacrifice for Hercules. Instead they decided to fit out a ship and donate it to
Tyre (II Maccabees 4:18-20). Although these Hellenists were willing to
participate in the athletic contests, they appear to have been squeamish about
doing something completely counter to Torah law.
When evaluating the Maccabees’ role, one must ask whether
these Hellenist Jews, deemed apostates by the Maccabees and their supporters,
had the right to assimilate their Jewish observance to the surrounding Greek
culture. The Maccabees answered with a resounding "no," and their
judgment was confirmed when eventually Menelaus convinced Antiochus to enact a
decree prohibiting Mosaic law. Through Antiochus’ decree, observance of the commandments
of the Torah became a capital offense, and the worship of pagan gods was
required.
The Maccabean struggle was also driven by issues of social
class. Because only the wealthy—the urban ruling class and large landowners,
led by the priests—were citizens, the "democracy" of the Hellenized
Jerusalem polis oppressed the vast
majority of Jews, who were powerless. Even before the Antiochan persecutions,
social antagonisms existed between the zealots of the traditional faith—the
urban craftspeople and village dwellers—and the freethinking Hellenizers,
suggesting that the Maccabees may have been liberators, but that they were also
driven by some degree of self-interest.
Legitimization
Through Zealotry
Whereas some modern sensibilities will be offended by the
Maccabees’ vicious treatment of the Hellenist Jews, First Maccabees not only
lauds Mattathias’ zealotry against his coreligionists, but uses that very
zealotry to legitimize the Maccabean dynasty. In First Maccabees, Mattathias
acts in the tradition of other zealots in the Torah by murdering a fellow Jew
in Modi’in who approaches a pagan altar to offer a sacrifice when requested to
do so by a royal official. When this apostate Jew steps up to the altar,
Mattathias kills him as well as the government official and then tears down the
altar. Mattathias declares, "Let everybody who is zealous for the law and
stands by the covenant follow me" (I Maccabees 2:27). With this
self-conscious echoing of the words of Moses when confronted with the Golden
Calf – “Whoever is for the Lord, come here” (Exodus 32:26) – First Maccabees
begins its justification of Maccabean zealotry.
First Maccabees continues by explicitly comparing Mattathias
to the biblical figure Pinchas, who killed a tribal leader and his Midianite
partner to stop the spread of idolatry and was rewarded by God with a "brit
shalom"--covenant of peace--of eternal priesthood (Numbers 25). The
implication is that Mattathias derives his political and religious authority
from this very act of zealotry, this taking of the law into his own hands,
based on his perception that the continued existence of the Jewish community
was in danger.
Although Mattathias saw himself as acting in a situation of
conflict between an earthly power and the law of God, his act might be viewed
from the outside as one of political terrorism; he had committed murder for the
sake of what he perceived to be a greater good. Judah continued the fight begun
by Mattathias by actively attacking apostasy—destroying idolatrous altars,
compelling observance of Torah by force, circumcising newborn infants, and
killing apostate violators of Torah law.
Later in the story, the Maccabean self-interest also led
them to reinterpret Torah law so that the Jews hiding with them in the
wilderness could defend themselves from government attack on the Sabbath. By
interpreting the law on their own authority, the Maccabees were setting
themselves up as an opposition government, infringing on the prerogatives of
the sitting High Priest.
Although the text of Maccabees views Judah as a liberator
whose zealotry was necessary to preserve the Torah and the Jewish people, later
rabbinic commentators frowned upon such zealotry, realizing the danger of
individuals taking the law into their own hands and interpreting it in accord
with their own interests. Consequently, normative Jewish law limits
"legitimate" zealotry nearly to the point of nonexistence: A zealot
is not allowed to act preemptively in expectation of a desecration, nor
punitively after the desecration has been completed; if he does so, he is
treated as a murderer. Because a zealot is considered to be acting outside the
law, the desecrator has the right to kill a zealot in self-defense. In
addition, rabbinical courts were forbidden to give permission to zealots to act
or to teach zealotry.
In the end, the Maccabees must be judged to be both
liberators and zealots. Like many figures in the Bible, these apocryphal heroes
are multi-layered, and their meaning is unraveled by successive generations
based on their own needs and experiences. In the world today, we may identify
with the Maccabean fight to preserve Judaism in the face of assimilation and
anti-Semitism, while at the same time working to mitigate religious zealotry
that threatens to turn Jew against Jew.
Michele Alperin is a freelance writer in Princeton, New
Jersey. She has a Masters Degree in
Jewish education from the Jewish Theological Seminary.