And Orthodox translations, too. The so-caled “apocrypha” are the books in the older Septaguint compilation of the Bible which the Protestants are uncomfortable with so they decided to go with the more recent Masoretic collection which left out those books.
Now why would the Jewish people "leave out" sacred writings from "their" Scriptures? The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament books IN ADDITION TO about fifteen other ones - most all which were already IN Greek, so no translation was necessary. The question isn't why Protestants left out books from "their" Bible, but why Roman Catholicism ADDED books to the Hebrew canon that were rejected by the Jews as Divinely-inspired? Were there "historical" writings? Sure, but that didn't mean they were automatically deemed inspired of God.
The Jewish people really didn't NEED the Roman Catholic church to "save" Hanukkah for them. This festival was celebrated by Jesus and his Jewish disciples as Festival of Lights/Feast of Dedication and had been since the second temple was rededicated. It is stated that Jesus was at the Jerusalem Temple during "the Feast of Dedication and it was winter", in John 10:22–23. The Greek term that is used is "the renewals" (Greek ta engkainia τὰ ἐγκαίνια).[21] Josephus refers to the festival as "lights." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanukkah)
I believe the EOs include them, plus one or two more, while Protestant rejection was not novel, as while generally established, scholarly questions and disagreements about certain books continued down thru the centuries and right into Trent. See here by Gods grace.
We figure that the JEWS ought to know their own scriptures a wee bit better than the claim that Rome does.
Interesting assumption on Rome's part.