Chapter D: FORENSIC, IN PRIVATE CAUSES.--I. Action for Libel (Greek: dike (3)

But Macaulay's health, which had begun to give way in 1852, was every year visibly failing. In May 1858 he went to Cambridge for the purpose of being sworn in as high steward of the borough, to which office he had been elected on the death of Earl Fitzwilliam. When his health was given at a public breakfast in the town-hall he was obliged to excuse himself from speaking. In the upper house he never spoke. Absorbed in the prosecution of his historical work, he had grown indifferent to the party politics of his own day. Gradually he had to acquiesce in the conviction that, though his intellectual powers remained unimpaired, his physical energies would not carry him through the reign of Anne; and, though he brought down the narrative to the death of William III., the last half-volume wants the finish and completeness of the earlier portions. The winter of 1859 told on him, and he died on the 28th of December. On the 9th of January 1860 he was buried in Westminster Abbey, in Poets' Corner, near the statue of Addison.

Lord Macaulay never married. A man of warm domestic affections, he found their satisfaction in the attachment and close sympathy of his sister Hannah, the wife of Sir Charles Trevelyan. Her children were to him as his own. Macaulay was a steadfast friend, and no act inconsistent with the strictest honour and integrity was ever imputed to him. When a poor man, and when salary was of consequence to him, he twice resigned office rather than make compliances for which he would not have been severely blamed. In 1847, when his seat in parliament was at stake, he would not be persuaded to humour, to temporize, even to conciliate. He had a keen relish for the good things of life, and desired fortune as the means of obtaining them; but there was nothing mercenary or selfish in his nature. When he had raised himself to opulence, he gave away with an open hand, not seldom rashly. His very last act was to write a letter to a poor curate enclosing a cheque for £25. The purity of his morals was not associated with any tendency to cant.

The lives of men of letters are often records of sorrow or suffering. The life of Macaulay was eminently happy. Till the closing years (1857-1859), he enjoyed life with the full zest of healthy faculty, happy in social intercourse, happy in the solitude of his study, and equally divided between the two. For the last fifteen years of his life he lived for literature. His writings were remunerative to him far beyond the ordinary measure, yet he never wrote for money. He lived in his historical researches; his whole heart and interest were unreservedly given to the men and the times of whom he read and wrote. His command of literature was imperial. Beginning with a good classical foundation, be made himself familiar with the imaginative, and then with the historical, remains of Greece and Rome. He went on to add the literature of his own country, of France, of Italy, of Spain. He learnt Dutch enough for the purposes of his history. He read German, but for the literature of the northern nations he had no taste, and of the erudite labours of the Germans he had little knowledge and formed an inadequate estimate. The range of his survey of human things had other limitations more considerable still. All philosophical speculation was alien to his mind; nor did he seem aware of the degree in which such speculation had influenced the progress of humanity. A large--the largest--part of ecclesiastical history lay outside his historical view. Of art he confessed himself ignorant, and even refused a request to furnish a critique on Swift's poetry to the _Edinburgh Review_. Lessing's _Laocoon_, or Goethe's criticism on Hamlet, "filled" him "with wonder and despair."

Of the marvellous discoveries of science which were succeeding each other day by day he took no note; his pages contain no reference to them. It has been told already how he recoiled from the mathematical studies of his university. These deductions made, the circuit of his knowledge still remains very wide--as extensive perhaps as any human brain is competent to embrace. His literary outfit was as complete as has ever been possessed by any English writer; and, if it wants the illumination of philosophy, it has an equivalent resource in a practical acquaintance with affairs, with administration, with the interior of cabinets, and the humour of popular assemblies. Nor was the knowledge merely stored in his memory; it was always at his command. Whatever his subject, he pours over it his stream of illustration, drawn from the records of all ages and countries. His _Essays_ are not merely instructive as history; they are, like Milton's blank verse, freighted with the spoils of all the ages. As an historian Macaulay has not escaped the charge of partisanship. He was a Whig; and in writing the history of the rise and triumph of Whig principles in the latter half of the 17th century he identified himself with the cause. But the charge of partiality, as urged against Macaulay, means more than that he wrote the history of the Whig revolution from the point of view of those who made it. When he is describing the merits of friends and the faults of enemies his pen knows no moderation. He has a constant tendency to glaring colours, to strong effects, and will always be striking violent blows. He is not merely exuberant but excessive. There is an overweening confidence about his tone; he expresses himself in trenchant phrases, which are like challenges to an opponent to stand up and deny them. His propositions have no qualifications. Uninstructed readers like this assurance, as they like a physician who has no doubt about their case. But a sense of distrust grows upon the more circumspect reader as he follows page after page of Macaulay's categorical affirmations about matters which our own experience of life teaches us to be of a contingent nature. We inevitably think of a saying attributed to Lord Melbourne: "I wish I were as cocksure of any one thing as Macaulay is of everything." Macaulay's was the mind of the advocate, not of the philosopher; it was the mind of Bossuet, which admits no doubts or reserves itself and tolerates none in others, and as such was disqualified from that equitable balancing of evidence which is the primary function of the historian.

Macaulay, the historian no less than the politician, is, however, always on the side of justice, fairness for the weak against the strong, the oppressed against the oppressor. But though a Liberal in practical politics, he had not the reformer's temperament. The world as it is was good enough for him. The glories of wealth, rank, honours, literary fame, the elements of vulgar happiness, made up his ideal of life. A successful man himself, every personage and every cause is judged by its success. "The brilliant Macaulay," says Emerson, "who expresses the tone of the English governing classes of the day, explicitly teaches that 'good' means good to eat, good to wear, material commodity." Macaulay is in accord with the average sentiment of orthodox and stereotyped humanity on the relative values of the objects and motives of human endeavour. And this commonplace materialism is one of the secrets of his popularity, and one of the qualities which guarantee that that popularity will be enduring. (M. P.)

Macaulay's whole works were collected in 1866 by his sister, Lady
Trevelyan, in 8 vols. The first four volumes are occupied by the
_History_; the next three contain the _Essays_, and the _Lives_ which
he contributed to the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_. In vol. viii. are
collected his _Speeches_, the _Lays of Ancient Rome_, and some
miscellaneous pieces. The "life" by Dean Milman, printed in vol. viii.
of the edition of 1858-1862, is prefixed to the "People's Edition" (4
vols., 1863-1864). Messrs. Longmans, Green & Co. published a complete
edition, the "Albany," in 12 vols., in 1898. There are numerous
editions of the _Critical and Historical Essays_, separately and
collectively; they were edited in 1903 by F. C. Montagu.

The _Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay_ (2 vols., 1876), by his
nephew, Sir George Otto Trevelyan, is one of the best biographies in
the English language. The life (1882) in the "English Men of Letters"
series was written by J. Cotter Morison. Far further criticism, see
Hepworth Dixon, in his _Life of Penn_ (1841); John Paget, _The New
Examen: Inquiry into Macaulay's History_ (1861) and _Paradoxes and
Puzzles_ (1874); Walter Bagehot, in the _National Review_ (Jan. 1856),
reprinted in his _Literary Studies_ (1879); James Spedding, _Evenings
with a Reviewer_ (1881), discussing his essay on Bacon; Sir L.
Stephen, _Hours in a Library_, vol. ii. (1892); Lord Morley, _Critical
Miscellanies_ (1877), vol. ii.; Lord Avebury, _Essays and Addresses_
(1903); Thum, _Anmerkungen zu Macaulay's History of England_
(Heilbronn, 1882). A bibliography of German criticism of Macaulay is
given in G. Körting's _Grd. der engl. Literatur_ (4th ed., Munster,
1905).

MACAW, or, as formerly spelt, MACCAW, the name given to some fifteen or more species of large, long-tailed birds of the parrot-family, natives of the neotropical region, and forming a very well-known and easily recognized genus _Ara_, and to the four species of Brazilian Hyacinthine macaws of the genera _Anodorhynchus_ and _Cyanopsittacus_. Most of the macaws are remarkable for their gaudy plumage, which exhibits the brightest scarlet, yellow, blue and green in varying proportion and often in violent contrast, while a white visage often adds a very peculiar and expressive character.[1] With one exception the known species of _Ara_ inhabit the mainland of America from Paraguay to Mexico, being especially abundant in Bolivia, where no fewer than seven of them (or nearly one half) have been found (_Proc. Zool. Soc._, 1879, p. 634). The single extra-continental species, _A. tricolor,_ is one of the most brilliantly coloured, and is peculiar to Cuba, where, according to Gundlach (_Ornitologia Cubana_, p. 126), its numbers are rapidly decreasing so that there is every chance of its becoming extinct.[2]

Of the best known species of the group, the blue-and-yellow macaw, _A. ararauna_, has an extensive range in South America from Guiana in the east to Colombia in the west, and southwards to Paraguay. Of large size, it is to be seen in almost every zoological garden, and it is very frequently kept alive in private houses, for its temper is pretty good, and it will become strongly attached to those who tend it. Its richly coloured plumage, sufficiently indicated by its common English name, supplies feathers eagerly sought by salmon-fishers for the making of artificial flies. The red-and-blue macaw, _A. macao_, is even larger and more gorgeously clothed, for, besides the colours expressed in its ordinary appellation, yellow and green enter into its adornment. It inhabits Central as well as South America as far as Bolivia, and is also a common bird in captivity, though perhaps less often seen than the foregoing. The red-and-yellow species, _A. chloroptera_, ranging from Panama to Brazil, is smaller, or at least has a shorter tail, and is not quite so usually met with in menageries. The red-and-green, _A. militaris_, smaller again than the last, is not unfrequent in confinement, and presents the colours of the name it bears. This has the most northerly extension of habitat, occurring in Mexico and thence southwards to Bolivia. In _A. manilata_ and _A. nobilis_ the prevailing colour is green and blue. The Hyacinthine macaws _A. hyacinthinus_, _A. leari_, _A. glaucus_ and _Cyanopsittacus spixi_ are almost entirely blue.

The macaws live well in captivity, either chained to a perch or kept in large aviaries in which their strong flight is noticeable. The note of these birds is harsh and screaming. The sexes are alike; the lustreless white eggs are laid in hollow trees, usually two at a time. The birds are gregarious but apparently monogamous. (A. N.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] This serves to separate the macaws from the long-tailed parakeets
of the New World (_Conurus_), to which they are very nearly allied.

[2] There is some reason to think that Jamaica may have formerly
possessed a macaw (though no example is known to exist), and if so it
was most likely a peculiar species. Sloane (_Voyage_, ii. 297), after
describing what he calls the "great maccaw" (_A. ararauna_), which he
had seen in captivity in that island, mentions the "small maccaw" as
being very common in the woods there, and P. H. Gosse (_Birds of
Jamaica_, p. 260) gives, on the authority of Robinson, a local
naturalist of the last century, the description of a bird which
cannot be reconciled with any species now known, though it must have
evidently been allied to the Cuban _A. tricolor_.

MACBETH, king of Scotland (d. 1058), was the son of Findlaech, _mormaer_ or hereditary ruler of Moreb (Moray and Ross), who had been murdered by his nephews in 1020. He probably became mormaer on the death of Malcolm, one of the murderers, in 1029, and he may have been one of the chiefs (the Maclbaethe of the _Saxon Chronicle_) who submitted to Canute in 1031. Marianus records that in 1040 Duncan, the grandson and successor of Malcolm king of Scotland, was slain by Macbeth. Duncan had shortly before suffered a severe defeat at the hands of Thorfinn, the Norwegian earl of Orkney and Caithness, and it was perhaps this event which tempted Macbeth to seize the throne. As far as is known he had no claim to the crown except through his wife Gruach, who appears to have been a member of the royal family. Macbeth was apparently a generous benefactor to the Church, and is said to have made a pilgrimage to Rome in 1050. According to S. Berchan his reign was a time of prosperity for Scotland. The records of the period, however, are extremely meagre, and much obscurity prevails, especially as to his relations with the powerful earl Thorfinn. More than one attempt was made by members of the Scottish royal family to recover the throne; in 1045 by Crinan, the lay abbot of Dunkeld, son-in-law of Malcolm II., and in 1054 by Duncan's son Malcolm with the assistance of Siward the powerful earl of Northumbria, himself a connexion of the ousted dynasty. Three years later in 1057 Malcolm and Siward again invaded Scotland and the campaign ended with the defeat and death of Macbeth, who was slain at Lumphanan. Macbeth is, of course, chiefly famous as the central figure of Shakespeare's great tragedy.

See W. F. Skene, _Chronicles of the Picts and Scots_ (1867) and
_Celtic Scotland_ (1876); Sir John Rhys, _Celtic Britain_ (1904).

MACCABEES, the name (in the plural) of a distinguished Jewish family dominant in Jerusalem in the 2nd century B.C. According to 1 Macc. ii. 4, the name Maccabaeus (Gr. [Greek: Makkabaios]-? Heb. [Hebrew: makabi]) was originally the distinctive surname of Judas, third son of the Jewish priest Mattathias, who struck the first blow for religious liberty during the persecution under Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes). Subsequently, however, it obtained a wider significance, having been applied first to the kinsmen of Judas, then to his adherents, and ultimately to all champions of religion in the Greek period. Thus the mother of the seven brethren, whose martyrdom is related in 2 Macc. vi., vii., is called by early Christian writers "the mother of the Maccabees." The name is used still more loosely in the titles of the so-called Third, Fourth and Fifth Books of Maccabees. It is now customary to apply it only to the sons and descendants of Mattathias. As, however, according to Josephus (_Ant._ xii. 6. 1), this brave priest's great-great-grandfather was called _Hasmon_ (i.e. "rich" = magnate; cf. Ps. lxviii. 31 [32]), the family is more correctly designated by the name of Hasmonaeans or Asmoneans (q.v.). This name Jewish authors naturally prefer to that of Maccabees; they also style 1 and 2 Macc. "Books of the Hasmonaeans."

If Maccabee (_maqqabi_) is the original form of the name, the most probable derivation is from the Aramaic _maqqaba_ (Heb. [Hebrew: makevet], Judg. iv. 21, &c.) = "hammer." The surname "hammerer" might have been applied to Judas either as a distinctive title pure and simple or symbolically as in the parallel case of Edward I., "Scotorum _malleus_." Even if _maqqaba_ does denote the ordinary workman's hammer, and not the great smith's hammer which would more fitly symbolize the impetuosity of Judas, this is not a fatal objection. The doubled _k_ of the Greek form is decisive against (1) the theory that the name Maccabee was made up of the initials of the opening words of Exod. xv. ii; (2) the derivation from [Hebrew: machvi] = "extinguisher" (cf. Isa. xliii. 17), based by Curtiss (_The Name Machabee_, Leipzig, 1876) on the Latin spelling Machabaeus = [Greek: Makkabaios], which Jerome probably adopted in accordance with the usage of the times.

The Maccabaean revolt was caused by the attempt of Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes), king of Syria (175-164 B. C.), to force Hellenism upon Judaea (see SELEUCID DYNASTY; HELLENISM). Ever since the campaigns of Alexander the Great, Greek habits and ideas had been widely adopted in Palestine. Over the higher classes especially Hellenism had cast its spell. This called forth the organized opposition of the Hasidim (= "the pious"), who constituted themselves champions of the Law. Joshua, who headed the Hellenistic faction, graecized his name into Jason, contrived to have the high-priesthood taken from his brother Onias III., and conferred upon himself, and set up a gymnasium hard by the Temple. After three years' tenure of office Jason was supplanted by the Benjamite Menelaus, who disowned Judaism entirely. Antiochus punished an outburst of strife between the rivals by plundering the Temple and slaying many of the inhabitants (170 B. C.). Two years later Jerusalem was devastated by his general Apollonius, and a Syrian garrison occupied the citadel (Akra). The Jews were ordered under pain of death to substitute for their own observances the Pagan rites prescribed for the empire generally. In December 168 sacrifice was offered to Zeus upon an idol altar ("the abomination of desolation," Dan. x. 27) erected over the great altar of burnt-offering. But Antiochus had miscalculated, and by his extreme measures unwittingly saved Judaism from its internal foes. Many hellenizers rallied round those who were minded to die rather than abjure their religion. The issue of an important edict ordaining the erection of heathen altars in every township of Palestine, and the appointment of officers to deal with recusants, brought matters to a crisis. At Modin, Mattathias, an aged priest, not only refused to offer the first sacrifice, but slew an apostate Jew who was about to step into the breach. He also killed the king's commissioner and pulled down the altar. Having thus given the signal for rebellion, he then with his five sons took to the mountains. In view of the ruthless slaughter of a thousand sabbatarians in the wilderness, Mattathias and his friends decided to resist attack even on the sabbath. Many, including the Hasidim, thereupon flocked to his standard, and set themselves to revive Jewish rites and to uproot Paganism from the land. In 166 Mattathias died, after charging his sons to give their lives for their ancestral faith, and nominating Judas Maccabaeus as their leader in the holy campaign.

The military genius of Judas made this the most stirring chapter in Israelitish history. In quick succession he overthrew the Syrian generals Apollonius, Seron and Gorgias, and after the regent Lysias had shared the same fate at his hands he restored the Temple worship (165). These exploits dismayed his opponents and kindled the enthusiasm of his friends. When, however, Lysias returned in force to renew the contest, Judas had to fall back upon the Temple mount, and escaped defeat only because the Syrian leader was obliged to hasten back to Antioch in order to prevent a rival from seizing the regency. Under these circumstances Lysias unexpectedly guaranteed to the Jews their religious freedom (162). But though they had thus gained their end, the struggle did not cease; it merely assumed a new phase. The Hasidim indeed were satisfied, and declined to fight longer, but the Maccabees determined not to desist until their nation was politically as well as religiously free. In 161 Judas defeated Nicanor at Adasa, but within a few weeks thereafter, in a heroic struggle against superior numbers under Bacchides at Elasa, he was himself cut off. Even this, however, did not prove fatal to the cause which Judas had espoused. If in his brother Jonathan it did not possess so brilliant a soldier, it had in him an astute diplomatist who knew how to exploit the internal troubles of Syria. In the contest between Demetrius I. and Alexander Balas for the throne, Jonathan supported the latter, who in 153 nominated him high priest, and conferred on him the order of "King's Friend," besides other honours. After the accession of Demetrius II. (145) Jonathan contrived to win his favour, and helped him to crush a rebellion in Antioch on condition that the Syrian garrisons should be withdrawn from Judaea. When, however, Demetrius failed to keep his word, Jonathan transferred his allegiance to Antiochus VI., whom Tryphon had crowned as king. After subjugating the territory between Jerusalem and Damascus, he routed the generals of Demetrius on the plain of Hazor. But as the Maccabees had now in the name of the Syrians cleared the Syrians out of Palestine, Tryphon's jealousy was aroused, and he resolved to be rid of Jonathan, who, with all his cunning, walked into a trap at Ptolemais, was made prisoner and ultimately slain (143). The leadership now devolved upon Simon, the last survivor of the sons of Mattathias. He soon got the better of Tryphon, who vainly tried to reach Jerusalem. Allying himself to Demetrius, Simon succeeded in negotiating a treaty whereby the political independence of Judaea was at length secured. The garrison in the Akra having been starved into submission, Simon triumphantly entered that fortress in May 142. In the following year he was by popular decree invested with absolute powers, being appointed leader, high priest and ethnarch. As these offices were declared hereditary in his family, he became the founder of the Hasmonaean dynasty. The first year of his reign (Seleucid year 170 = 143-142 B.C.) was made the beginning of a new era, and the issue of a Jewish coinage betokened the independence of his sovereignty. Under Simon's administration the country enjoyed signal prosperity. Its internal resources were assiduously developed; trade, agriculture, civic justice and religion were fostered; while at no epoch in its post-exilic history did Israel enjoy an equal measure of social happiness (I Macc. xiv. 4 seq.). Simon's beneficent activities came, however, to a sudden and tragic end. In 135 he and two of his sons were murdered by Ptolemy, his son-in-law, who had an eye to the supreme power. But Simon's third son, John Hyrcanus, warned in time, succeeded in asserting his rights as hereditary head of the state. All the sons of Mattathias had now died for the sake of "The Law"; and the result of their work, so valorously prosecuted for over thirty years, was a new-born enthusiasm in Israel for the ancestral faith. The Maccabaean struggle thus gave fresh life to the Jewish nation.

After the death of Antiochus VII. Sidetes in 128 left him a free hand, Hyrcanus (135-105) soon carved out for himself a large and prosperous kingdom, which, however, was rent by internal discord owing to the antagonism developed between the rival parties of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Hyrcanus was succeeded by his son Aristobulus, whose reign of but one year was followed by that of his brother, the warlike Alexander Jannaeus (104-78). The new king's Sadducean proclivities rendered him odious to the populace, which rose in revolt, but only to bring upon itself a savage revenge. The accession of his widow Salome Alexandra (78-69) witnessed a complete reversal of the policy pursued by Jannaeus, for she chose to rule in accordance with the ideals of the Pharisees. Her elder son, Hyrcanus II., a pliable weakling, was appointed high priest; her younger son, the energetic Aristobulus, who chafed at his exclusion from office, seized some twenty strongholds and with an army bore down upon Jerusalem. At this crisis Alexandra died, and Hyrcanus agreed to retire in favour of his masterful brother. A new and disturbing element now entered into Jewish politics in the person of the Idumaean Antipater, who for selfish ends deliberately made mischief between the brothers. An appeal to M. Aemilius Scaurus, who in 65 came into Syria as the legate of Pompey, led to the interference of the Romans, the siege of Jerusalem by Pompey, and the vassalage of the Jews (q.v.). Hyrcanus II. was appointed high priest and ethnarch, without the title of king (63). Repeated but fruitless attempts were made by the Hasmonaeans and their patriotic supporters to throw off the Roman yoke. In 47 Antipater, who curried favour with Rome, was made procurator of Judaea, and his sons Phasael and Herod governors of Jerusalem and Galilee respectively. Six years later the Idumaean brothers were appointed tetrarchs of Judaea. At length, in 40, the Parthians set up as king Antigonus, sole surviving son of Aristobulus. Thereupon Phasael committed suicide in prison, but Herod effected his escape and with the help of the Romans seated himself on the throne of Judaea (37 B.C.). Through the execution of Antigonus by M. Antonius (Mark Antony) the same year the Hasmonaean dynasty became extinct.

LITERATURE.--1 and 2 Macc. and Josephus are the main sources for the
Maccabaean history. For references in classical authors see E.
Schürer, _Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes_ (1901, p 106 seq.). Besides
the numerous modern histories of Israel (e.g. those by Dérenbourg,
Ewald, Stanley, Stade, Renan, Schürer, Kent, Wellhausen, Guthe), see
also Madden, _Coins of the Jews_ (1881), H. Weiss's _Judas Makkabaeus_
(1897), and the articles in the _Ency. Bib._, Hastings's _Dict.
Bible_, the _Jewish Encyclopedia_. Among more popular sketches are
Moss's _From Malachi to Matthew_ (1893); Streanes' _The Age of the
Maccabees_ (1898); Morrison's _The Jews under Roman Rule_ ("Story of
the Nations" series); W. Fairweather's _From the Exile to the Advent_
(1901); E. R. Bevan's _Jerusalem under the High Priests_ (1904); F.
Henderson's _The Age of the Maccabees_ (1907); also, articles JEWS;
SELEUCID DYNASTY. (W. F.*)

MACCABEES, BOOKS OF, the name given to several Apocryphal books of the Old Testament. The Vulgate contains two books of Maccabees which were declared canonical by the council of Trent (1546) and found a place among the Apocrypha of the English Bible. Three other books of this name are extant. Book iii. is included in the Septuagint but not in the Vulgate. Book iv. is embraced in the Alexandrian, Sinaitic, and other MSS. of the Septuagint, as well as in some MSS. of Josephus. A "Fifth" book is contained in the Ambrosian Peshitta, but it seems to be merely a Syriac reproduction of the sixth book of Josephus's history of the _Jewish War_. None of the books of Maccabees are contained in the Vatican (B); all of them are found in a Syriac recension.

_1 Maccabees_ was originally written in Hebrew, but is preserved only in a Greek translation. Origen gives a transliteration of "its Semitic title,"[1] and Jerome says distinctly: "The First Book of Maccabees I found in Hebrew." The frequent Hebraisms which mark the Greek translation, as well as the fact that some obscure passages in the Greek text are best accounted for as mistranslations from the Hebrew, afford internal evidence of the truth of this testimony. There are good reasons for regarding the book as a unity, although some scholars (Destinon, followed by Wellhausen) consider the concluding chapters (xiii.-xvi.) a later addition unknown to Josephus, who, however, seems to have already used the Greek. It probably dates from about the beginning of the first century B.C.[2]

As it supplies a detailed and accurate record of the forty years from the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes to the death of Simon (175-135 B.C.), without doubt the most stirring chapter in Jewish history, the book is one of the most precious historical sources we possess. In its careful chronology, based upon the Seleucid era, in the minuteness of its geographical knowledge, in the frankness with which it records defeat as well as victory, on the restraint with which it speaks of the enemies of the Jews, in its command of details, it bears on its face the stamp of genuineness. Not that it is wholly free from error or exaggeration, but its mistakes are due merely to defective knowledge of the outside world, and its overstatements, virtually confined to the matter of numbers, proceed from a patriotic desire to magnify Jewish victories. While the author presumably had some written sources at his disposal,[3] his narrative is probably for the most part founded upon personal knowledge and recollection of the events recorded, and upon such first-hand information as, living in the second generation after, he would still be in a position to obtain. His sole aim is honestly to relate what he knew of the glorious struggles of his nation.

Although written in the style of the historical books of the old Testament, the work is characterized by a religious reticence which avoids even the use of the divine name, and by the virtual absence of the Messianic hope. The observance of the law is strongly urged, and the cessation of prophecy deplored (iv. 46; xiv. 41). There is no allusion either to the immortality of the soul or to the resurrection of the dead. The rewards to which the dying Mattathias points his sons are all for this life. Many scholars are of opinion that the unknown author was a Sadducee,[4] but all that can be said with certainty is that he was a Palestinian Jew devotedly attached to the national cause.

Until the council of Trent 1 Maccabees had only "ecclesiastical" rank,
and although not accepted as canonical by the Protestant churches, it
has always been held in high estimation. Luther says "it closely
resembles the rest of the books of Holy Scripture, and would not be
unworthy to be enumerated with them."

_2 Maccabees_, the epitome of a larger work in five books by one Jason of Cyrene, deals with the same history as its predecessor, except that it begins at a point one year earlier (176 B.C.), and stops short at the death of Nicanor (161 B.C.), thus covering a period of only fifteen years. First of all[5] the writer describes the futile attempt of Heliodorus to rob the Temple, and the malicious intrigues of the Benjamite Simon against the worthy high priest Onias III. (iii. i-iv. 6). As throwing light upon the situation prior to the Maccabaean revolt this section of the book is of especial value. Chapters iv. 7-vii. 42 contain a more detailed narrative of the events recorded in 1 Macc. i. 10-64. The remainder of the book runs parallel to 1 Macc, iii.-vii.

Originally written in excellent Greek, from a pronouncedly Pharisaic standpoint, it was possibly directed against the Hasmonaean dynasty. It shows no sympathy with the priestly class. Both in trustworthiness and in style it is inferior to 1 Macc. Besides being highly coloured, the narrative does not observe strict chronological sequence. Instead of the sober annalistic style of the earlier historian we have a work marked by hyperbole, inflated rhetoric and homiletic reflection. Bitter invective is heaped upon the national enemies, and strong predilection is shown for the marvellous. The fullness and inaccuracy of detail which are a feature of the book suggest that Jason's information was derived from the recollections of eye-witnesses orally communicated. In spite of its obvious defects, however, it forms a useful supplement to the first book.

The writer's interests are religious rather than historical. In 1 Macc, there is a keen sense of the part to be played by the Jews themselves, of the necessity of employing their own skill and valour; here they are made to rely rather upon divine intervention. Fantastic apparitions of angelic and supernatural beings, gorgeously arrayed and mostly upon horseback, are frequently introduced. In general, the views reflected in the book are those of the Pharisees. The ungodly will be punished mercilessly, and in exact correspondence to their sins.[6] The chastisements of erring Jews are of short duration, and intended to recall them to duty. If the faithful suffer martyrdom, it is in order to serve as an example to others, and they shall be compensated by being raised up "unto an eternal renewal of life." The eschatology of 2 Macc. is singularly advanced, for it combines the doctrine of a resurrection with that of immortality. It is worthy of note that the Roman Church finds support in this book for its teaching with reference to prayers for the dead and purgatory (xii. 43 seq.). An allusion to Jeremiah as "he who prayeth much for the people and the holy city" (xv. 14) it likewise appeals to as favouring its views respecting the intercession of the saints.

Neither of Jason's work, nor of the epitomizer's, can the precise date be determined. The changed relations with Rome (viii. 10, 36) prove, however, that the latter was written later than 1 Macc.; and it is equally clear that it was composed before the destruction of Jerusalem, A.D. 70.

The account given of the martyrs in chs. vi. and vii. led to frequent
allusions to this book in early patristic literature. Only Augustine,
however, was minded to give it the canonical rank to which it has been
raised by the Roman Church. Luther judged of it as unfavourably as he
judged of 1 Macc, favourably, and even "wished it had never existed."

_3 Maccabees_, although purporting to be an historical narrative, is really an animated, if somewhat vapid, piece of fiction written in Greek somewhere between 100 B.C. and A.D. 70,[7] and apparently preserved only in part.[8] It has no connexion with the Hasmonaeans, but is a story of the deliverance experienced by the Egyptian Jews from impending martyrdom at the hand of Ptolemy IV. Philopator, who reigned in the century previous to the Maccabaean rising (222-205 B.C.). The title is of later origin, and rendered possible only by the generalization of the name Maccabee so as to embrace all who suffered for the ancestral faith. Josephus refers the legend on which it is based to the time of Ptolemy VII. Physcon (146-117 B.C.). Some scholars (Ewald, Reuss, Hausrath) think that what the story really points to is the persecution under Caligula, but in that case Ptolemy would naturally have been represented as claiming divine honours. No other source informs us of a visit to Jerusalem, or of a persecution of the Jews, on the part of Philopator. Possibly, however, the story may be founded on some historical situation regarding which we have no definite knowledge. The purpose of the writer was evidently to cheer his Egyptian brethren during some persecution at Alexandria. Although the book was favourably regarded in the Syrian, it was apparently unknown to the Latin Church. Among the Jews it was virtually ignored.

Briefly, the tale is as follows:--After the battle of Raphia[9] (217
B.C.), Ptolemy IV. Philopator insisted on entering the sanctuary at
Jerusalem, but was struck down by the Almighty in answer to the
prayers of the horrified Jews. On his return to Egypt he revenged
himself by curtailing the religious liberty of the Alexandrian Jews,
and by depriving of their civic rights all who refused to worship
Bacchus. Exasperated by their loyalty to their religion, the king
ordered all the Jews in Egypt to be imprisoned in the hippodrome of
Alexandria. Clerks were told off to prepare a list of the prisoners'
names, but after forty days constant toil they had exhausted their
writing materials without finishing their task. Ptolemy further
commanded that 500 elephants should be intoxicated and let loose upon
the occupants of the race-course. Only an accident prevented the
carrying out of this design; the king had slept until it was past the
time for his principal meal. On the following day, in virtue of a
divinely induced forgetfulness, Ptolemy recollected nothing but the
loyalty of the Jews to his throne. The same evening, nevertheless, he
repeated his order for their destruction. Accordingly, on the morning
of the third day, when the king attended to see his commands
executed, things had reached a crisis. The Jews prayed to the Lord for
mercy, and two angels appeared from heaven, to the confusion of the
royal troops, who were trampled down by the elephants. Ptolemy now
vented his wrath upon his counsellors, liberated the Jews, and feasted
them for seven days. They determined that these should be kept as
festal days henceforth in commemoration of their deliverance. The
provincial governors were enjoined to take the Jews under their
protection, and leave was given to the latter to slay those of their
kinsmen who had deserted the faith. They further celebrated their
deliverance at Ptolemais, where they built a synagogue, and they
reached their various abodes to find themselves not only reinstated in
their possessions, but raised in the esteem of the Egyptians.

_4 Maccabees_ differs essentially from the other books of this name. While it does not itself aim at being a history, it makes striking use of Jewish history for purposes of edification. It bears, moreover, a distinctly philosophical character, and takes the form of a "tractate" or discourse, addressed to Jews only,[10] upon "the supremacy of pious reason over the passions." [11] The material is well arranged and systematically handled. In the prologue (i. 1-12) the writer explains the aim and scope of his work. Then follows the first main division (i. 13-iii. 18), in which he treats philosophically the proposition that reason is the mistress of the passions, inquiring what is meant by "reason" and what by "passion," as well as how many kinds of passion there are, and whether reason rules them all. The conclusion reached is that with the exception of forgetfulness and ignorance all the affections are under the lordship of reason, or at all events of _pious_ reason. To follow the dictates of pious reason in opposition to natural inclination is to have learned the secret of victory over the passions. In the second part of the book (iii. 19-xviii. 5) the writer goes on to prove his thesis from Jewish history, dwelling in particular upon the noble stand made against the tyranny of Antiochus IV. Epiphanes by the priest Eleazar, the seven brothers and their mother--all of whom chose torture and death rather than apostatize from the faith. Finally he appeals to his readers to emulate these acts of piety (xvii. 7-xviii. 24). In his gruesome descriptions of physical sufferings the author offends against good taste even more than the writer of 2 Macc., while both contrast very unfavourably in this respect with the sober reserve of the gospel narratives.

The book is written in a cultured, if somewhat rhetorical, Greek style, and is unmistakably coloured by the Stoic philosophy. The four cardinal virtues are represented as forms of wisdom, which again is inseparable from the Mosaic law. That the writer owes no slavish adherence to any philosophical system is plain from his independent treatment of the affections. Although influenced by Hellenism, he is a loyal Jew, earnestly desirous that all who profess the same faith should adhere to it in spite of either Greek allurements or barbaric persecution. It is not to reason as such, but only to pious reason (i.e. to reason enlightened and controlled by the divine law), that he attributes lordship over the passions. While in his zeal for legalism he virtually adopts the standpoint of Pharisaism, he is at one with Jewish Hellenism in substituting belief in the soul's immortality for the doctrine of a bodily resurrection.

The name of the author is unknown. He was, however, clearly a Hellenistic Jew, probably resident in Alexandria or Asia Minor. In the early Church the work was commonly ascribed to Josephus and incorporated with his writings. But apart from the fact that it is found also in several MSS. of the Septuagint, the language and style of the book are incompatible with his authorship. So also is the circumstance that 2 Macc., which forms the basis of 4 Macc., was unknown to Josephus. Moreover, several unhistorical statements (such as, e.g. that Seleucus was succeeded by his _son_ Antiochus Epiphanes, iv. 15) militate against the view that Josephus was the author. The date of composition cannot be definitely fixed. It is, however, safe to say that the book must have been written later than 2 Macc., and (in view of the acceptance it met with in the Christian Church) prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. Most likely it is a product of the Herodian period.

_5 Maccabees._ Writing in 1566 Sixtus Senensis mentions having seen at Lyons a manuscript of a so-called "Fifth Book of Maccabees" in the library of Santas Pagninus, which was soon afterwards destroyed by fire. It began with the words: "After the murder of Simon, John his son became high priest in his stead." Sixtus conjectures that it may have been a Greek translation of the "chronicles" of John Hyrcanus, alluded to in 1 Macc., xvi. 24. He acknowledges that it is a history of Hyrcanus practically on the lines of Josephus, but concludes from its Hebraistic style that it was not from that writer's pen. The probability, however, is that it was "simply a reproduction of Josephus, the style being changed perhaps for a purpose" (Schürer).

The Arabic "Book of Maccabees" contained in the Paris and London Polyglotts, and purporting to be a history of the Jews from the affair of Heliodorus (186 B.C.) to the close of Herod's reign, is historically worthless, being nothing but a compilation from 1 and 2 Macc. and Josephus. In the one chapter (xii.) where the writer ventures to detach himself from these works he commits glaring historical blunders. The book was written in somewhat Hebraistic Greek subsequent to A.D. 70. In Cotton's English translation of _The Five Books of Maccabees_ it is this book that is reckoned the "Fifth."

The best modern editions of the Greek text of the four books of
Maccabees are those of O. F. Fritzsche (1871) and H. B. Swete
(Cambridge Septuagint, vol. iii., 1894). C. J. Ball's _The Variorum
Apocrypha_ will be found specially useful by those who cannot
conveniently consult the Greek. The best modern commentary is that of
C. L. W. Grimm (1853-1857). C. F. Keil's commentary on 1 and 2 Macc.
is very largely indebted to Grimm. More recently there have appeared
commentaries by E. C. Bissell on 1, 2 and 3 Macc. in Lange-Schaff's
commentary, 1880--the whole Apocrypha being embraced in one volume,
and much of the material being transferred from Grimm; G. Rawlinson on
1 and 2 Macc. in the _Speaker's Commentary_ 1888 (containing much
useful matter, but marred by too frequent inaccuracy); O. Zöckler, on
1, 2 and 3 Macc., 1891 (slight and unsatisfactory); W. Fairweather and
J. S. Black on 1 Macc. in the _Cambridge Bible for Schools_ (1897); E.
Kautzsch on 1 and 3 Macc., A. Kamphausen on 2 Macc. and A. Deissmann
on 4 Macc. in _Die Apok. u. Pseudepigr. des Alt. Test._, 1898 (a most
serviceable work for the student of apocryphal literature). Brief but
useful introductions to all the four books of Maccabees are given in
E. Schürer's _Geschichte des Judischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu
Christi_ (3rd ed., 1898-1901; Eng. tr. of earlier edition, 1886-1890).
(W. F.*)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] [Greek: Sarbeth Sabanaiel] (Sarbeth Sabanaiel). No satisfactory
explanation of this title has yet been given from the Hebrew (see the
commentaries). The book may, however, have been known to Origen only
in an Aramaic translation, in which case, according to the happy
conjecture of Dalman (_Gramm._ 6) the two words may have represented
the Aramaic [Hebrew: sefer beit Hashmonai] ("book of the Hasmonaean
house").

[2] If the book is a unity, ch. xvi. 23 implies that it was written
after the death of Hyrcanus which occurred in 105 B.C. On the other
hand the friendly references to Rome in ch. viii. show that it must
have been written before the siege of Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 B.C.

[3] Cf. ix. 22, xi. 37, xiv. 18, 27.

[4] See especially Geiger, _Urschrift und Uebersetzungen der Bibel_,
206 seq.

[5] Prefixed to the book are two spurious letters from Palestinian
Jews (i., ii. 18), having no real connexion with it, or even with one
another, further than that they both urge Egyptian Jews to observe
the Feast of the Dedication. Between these and the main narrative is
inserted the writer's own preface, in which he explains the source
and aim of his work (ii. 19-32).

[6] iv. 38. 42; v. 9 seq.; ix. 5-18.

[7] The date of composition can be only approximately determined. As
the writer is acquainted with the Greek additions to Daniel (vi. 6),
the first century B.C. forms the superior limit; and as the book
found favour in the Eastern Church, the first century A.D. forms the
inferior limit.

[8] Apart from its abrupt commencement, the references in i. 2 to
"the plot" as something already specified, and in ii. 25 to the
king's "before-mentioned" companions, of whom, however, nothing is
said in the previous section of the book, point to the loss of at
least an introductory chapter.

[9] The statements with reference to the war between Antiochus the
Great and Ptolemy Philopator are in general agreement with those of
the classical historians, and to this extent the tale may be said to
have an historical setting. By Grimm (_Einl._ § 3), the observance of
the two yearly festivals (vi. 26; vii. 19), and the existence of the
synagogue at Ptolemais when the book was written, are viewed as the
witness of tradition to the fact of some great deliverance. Fritzsche
has well pointed out, however (art. "Makkabäer" in Schenkel's
_Bibel-Lexicon_) that in the hands of Jewish writers of the period
nearly every event of consequence has a festival attached to it.

[10] Even if with Freudenthal we regard the work as a homily actually
delivered to a Jewish congregation--and there are difficulties in the
way of this theory, particularly the absence of a Biblical text--it
was clearly intended for publication. It is essentially a book in the
form of a discourse, whether it was ever orally delivered or not. So
Deissmann in Kautzsch, _Die Apok. u. Pseudepigr. des A. T._ ii. 151.

[11] Hence the title sometimes given to it: [Greek: autokratoros
logismou] ("On the supremacy of reason"). It is also styled [Greek:
Makkabaion d', Makkabaikon, eis tous Makkabaious].

MacCARTHY, DENIS FLORENCE (1817-1882), Irish poet, was born in Dublin on the 26th of May 1817, and educated there and at Maynooth. His earlier verses appeared in _The Dublin Satirist_, and in 1843 he became a regular contributor of political verse to the recently founded _Nation_. He also took an active part in the Irish political associations. In 1846 he edited _The Poets and Dramatists of Ireland_ and the _Book of Irish Ballads_. His collected _Ballads, Poems and Lyrics_ (1850), including translations from nearly all the modern languages, took immensely with his countrymen on account of their patriotic ring. This was followed by _The Bellfounder_ (1857), _Under-glimpses_ and other poems (1857) and _The Early Life of Shelley_ (1871). In 1853 he began a number of translations from the Spanish of Calderon's dramas, which won for him a medal from the Royal Spanish Academy. He had already been granted a civil list pension for his literary services. He died in Ireland on the 7th of April 1882.

M'CARTHY, JUSTIN (1830- ), Irish politician, historian and novelist, was born in Cork on the 22nd of November 1830, and was educated at a school in that town. He began his career as a journalist, at the age of eighteen, in Cork. From 1853 to 1859 he was in Liverpool, on the staff of the _Northern Daily Times_, during which period he married (in March 1855) Miss Charlotte Allman. In 1860 he removed to London, as parliamentary reporter to the _Morning Star_, of which he became editor in 1864. He gave up his post in 1868, and, after a lecturing tour in the United States, joined the staff of the _Daily News_ as leader-writer in 1870. In this capacity he became one of the most useful and respected upholders of the Liberal politics of the time. He lectured again in America in 1870-1871, and again in 1886-1887. He represented Co. Longford in Parliament as a Liberal and Home Ruler from 1879 to 1885; North Longford, 1885-1886; Londonderry, 1886-1892; and North Longford from 1892 to 1900. He was chairman of the Anti-Parnellites from the fall of C. S. Parnell in 1890 until January 1896; but his Nationalism was of a temperate and orderly kind, and though his personal distinction singled him out for the chairmanship during the party dissensions of this period, he was in no active sense the political leader. His real bent was towards literature. His earliest publications were novels, some of which, such as _A Fair Saxon_ (1873), _Dear Lady Disdain_ (1875), _Miss Misanthrope_ (1878), _Donna Quixote_ (1879), attained considerable popularity. His most important work is his _History of Our Own Times_ (vols. i.-iv., 1879-1880; vol. v., 1897), which treats of the period between Queen Victoria's accession and her diamond jubilee. Easily and delightfully written, and on the whole eminently sane and moderate, these volumes form a brilliant piece of narrative from a Liberal standpoint. He also began a _History of the Four Georges_ (1884-1901), of which the latter half was written by his son, Justin Huntly M'Carthy (b. 1860), himself the author of various clever novels, plays, poetical pieces and short histories. Justin M'Carthy, amongst other works, wrote biographies of Sir Robert Peel (1891), Pope Leo XIII. (1896) and W. E. Gladstone (1898); _Modern England_ (1898); _The Reign of Queen Anne_ (1902) and _Reminiscences_ (2 vols., 1899).

McCHEYNE, ROBERT MURRAY (1813-1843), Scottish divine, was born at Edinburgh on the 21st of May 1813, was educated at the University and at the Divinity Hall of his native city, and held pastorates at Larbert, near Falkirk, and Dundee. A mission of inquiry among the Jews throughout Europe and in Palestine, and a religious revival at his church in Dundee, made him feel that he was being called to evangelistic rather than to pastoral work, but before he could carry out his plans he died, on the 25th of March 1843. McCheyne, though wielding remarkable influence in his lifetime, was still more powerful afterwards, through his _Memoirs and Remains_, edited by Andrew Bonar, which ran into far over a hundred English editions. Some of his hymns, e.g. "When this passing world is done," are well known.

See his _Life_, by J. C. Smith (1910).

McCLELLAN, GEORGE BRINTON (1826-1885), American soldier, was born in Philadelphia on the 3rd of December 1826. After passing two years (1840-1842) in the university of Pennsylvania, he entered the United States military academy, from which he graduated with high honours in July 1846. Sent as a lieutenant of engineers to the Mexican War, he took part in the battles under General Scott, and by his gallantry won the brevets of first-lieutenant at Contreras-Churubusco and captain at Chapultepec; he was afterwards detailed as assistant-instructor at West Point, and employed in explorations in the South-West and in Oregon. Promoted in 1855 captain of cavalry, he served on a military commission sent to Europe to study European armies and especially the war in the Crimea. On his return he furnished an able and interesting report, republished (1861) under the title of _Armies of Europe_. In 1856 he designed a saddle, which was afterwards well known as the McClellan. Resigning his commission in 1857, McClellan became successively chief engineer and vice-president of the Illinois Central railroad (1857-1860), general superintendent of the Mississippi & Ohio railroad, and, a little later, president of the eastern branch of the same, with his residence in Cincinnati. When the Civil War broke out he was, in April 1861, made major-general of three months' militia by the governor of Ohio; but General Scott's favour at Washington promoted him rapidly (May 14) to the rank of major-general, U.S.A., in command of the department of the Ohio. Pursuant to orders, on the 26th of May, McClellan sent a small force across the Ohio river to Philippi, dispersed the Confederates there early in June, and immensely aided the Union cause in that region by rapid and brilliant military successes, gained in the short space of eight days. These operations, though comparatively trivial as the Civil War developed, brought great results, in permanently dividing old Virginia by the creation of the state of West Virginia, and in presenting the first sharp, short and wholly successful campaign of the war.