The Great Christ Comet (7 page)

At the same time, much concerning the history of Bab­ylo­nian astronomy remains a mystery.
49
However, it is evident that Bab­ylo­nian astronomy greatly influenced Greek astronomers such as Hipparchus (second century BC).
50

The Magi's Journey.
If the Magi had come due west from Bab­ylon to Jerusalem, they would have covered about 550 miles.

Time.
The long distance raises the question of how long it took the Magi to get to Jerusalem. Kidger proposes that the Magi would have taken 2 weeks to prepare for their journey from Bab­ylon to Jerusalem and that their camel caravan then traveled at approximately 2 miles per hour, or 16 miles per day, with the result that they arrived in Bethlehem about 2 months after they had seen the star in the east.
51
Colin Humphreys proposed that the journey lasted 1–2 months.
52
There is no reason to believe that it took the Magi long to depart, and every reason to think that they would have left quickly—after all, they interpreted the celestial sign to mean that the King of the Jews had just been born in Judea, and they were eager to worship him. We can probably safely presume that they left in the immediate aftermath of the completion of the sign in the east. Assuming they traveled by camel caravan, an arrival time in Bethlehem approximately 28–37 days after they had set out would have been normal by ancient standards (an average speed of 15–20 miles per day).

Destination: Jerusalem.
The Magi made their way from their eastern homeland “to Jerusalem.” Jerusalem was the capital city of Judea, and it had been the royal city of the Davidic dynasty from the turn of the first millennium BC until the dynasty's eventual demise early in the sixth century BC.

It seems that the Magi had discerned from the celestial phenomenon they had witnessed in their homeland that the long-awaited Messiah had just been born. It was, of course, most natural for them to presuppose that this nativity of the King of the Jews had transpired in Judea and, in particular, in its capital, Jerusalem. The Magi might theoretically have assumed that the new king would be a member of Herod's own household. However, the fact that Herod's first and only encounter with the Magi occurs in Matthew 2:7–9a, after he had summoned them into his presence, suggests that they did not immediately make their way to the palace but simply made enquiries around Jerusalem.

Was the Star present during their journey from Bab­ylon to Jerusalem?
The text is not explicit regarding what the Star did after its time in the eastern sky (v. 2) but before its appearance during the final, Jerusalem-to-Bethlehem stage of the Magi's journey (v. 9). Did the Star disappear during that period or did it remain visible?

Some scholars argue that the Star was unobservable for the duration of the Magi's westward journey.
53
This interpretation could be regarded as favored by: (a) the fact that the Magi, rather than going straight to Bethlehem, went to Jerusalem and there enquired as to where the newborn messianic King was (vv. 1–9a); (b) verse 9's reference to the Star of Bethlehem as “the star that they had seen at its rising”; and (c) the Magi's ecstatic joy upon seeing the Star at the climax of their journey (v. 10).

However, in response to (a), the Magi may
have visited Judea's capital city because the Star's guidance was general rather than specific, because they wrongly concluded that the Star had pinpointed Jerusalem or completed its mission, or because clouds prevented them from seeing it in the period immediately prior to their arrival in Jerusalem.

In response to (b), the reference to the Star during the final stage of the Magi's journey as the one that they had seen earlier, at its rising, need not imply its absence in the intervening period, but may merely underscore the natal significance of the Star. It was, after all—as we shall highlight below—what the Star did in connection with its rising that disclosed to the Magi that the King of the Jews had been born. When the Star appears in order to usher the Magi to Bethlehem and ultimately to the Messiah himself, it is very natural to recall that this same Star had by its behavior in the eastern sky prompted the Magi to make their remarkable pilgrimage to Judea in search of the newborn Messiah.

In response to (c), as we shall see, the Magi's joy upon seeing the Star in verse 10 probably does not relate to the appearance of the Star in the sky as they left Jerusalem, but rather to the standing up of the Star over the house in Bethlehem where Jesus was, which was the focus of verse 9b.
54

In favor of the view that the Star did not disappear from sight for the duration of the Magi's journey to Judea is that the Star that they saw on the last phase of their trip, from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, is explicitly identified as the very same one they had previously observed, back in their eastern homeland (v. 9). Had there been any notable period of absence between the two stages of the Star's appearance, there could have been no certainty that the same identical Star was in view. This is particularly the case because the Star at the climax of the Magi's journey is in a completely different part of the sky—the south—whereas at the time of its rising it was in the east. The only logical conclusion to draw is that the Magi had been tracking the Star's movements in the intervening period.

That raises the question of where the Star was while the Magi were traveling from their homeland to Jerusalem. Did it quickly move to the west to guide them toward Judea? A westward-leading Star might have played some part in the Magi's decision to travel 550 miles to worship the Messiah, and the western route that they seem to have taken. Certainly by the end of their journey it had migrated to the southern sky, but that does not mean that it was not, in the days leading up to their arrival in Jerusalem, being perceived to be guiding them westward. Any star that appears at a reasonable altitude in the southern sky in the first half of the night, as evidently did the Star of Bethlehem at the climax of its appearance, will naturally proceed over the course of the following hours to set in the western sky. Accordingly, as the Star advanced toward and then over the horizon each night, it may well have seemed to the Magi to be going on ahead of them to Jerusalem. Indeed it is very possible that, the night before the Magi arrived in Jerusalem, the Star set in the direction of Judea's capital city, prompting them to conclude that it was their destination. If the Magi had come to regard the Star as their very own celestial guide over the preceding weeks, their perception that it was, on the final stage of their journey, ushering them to Bethlehem and then pinpointing the Messiah's location within Bethlehem would make especial sense.

While therefore the text does not make explicit what the Star did between its appearance in the eastern sky and its appearance when the Magi departed from Jerusalem toward
Bethlehem, it is probable that the Star was present throughout this time and that it was perceived by them to be a westward guide.

The Wonder in the Eastern Sky.
Matthew 2:2 records that when the Magi arrived in Jerusalem, they asked, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star at its rising and have come to worship him.” This is the only statement attributed to the Magi in the narrative. From it we get some idea of what the Magi saw in the heavens that motivated them to travel westward, and how they interpreted it. That they mention that they
saw
the Star's rising indicates that it was an observed phenomenon rather than something that they merely calculated, and this may well imply that what happened at that time was, as far as they were concerned, unexpected and marvelous.

Announcing a birth.
The Magi believed that the astronomical wonder they had seen indicated that a special birth had taken place. In light of this, and considering the likelihood that they left promptly and traveled some 28–37 days from their homeland to Jerusalem, we conclude that they would have fully expected to find a recently born baby boy.

King of the Jews.
Somehow the Magi had deduced that the one whose birth had been announced in the heavens was in particular the King of the Jews.

The Messiah's Star.
The Eastern Magi justified their question regarding the location of the recently born messianic baby by explaining that they had seen “his star” (Matt. 2:2). The Magi clearly regarded one particular celestial body as closely identified with the Messiah; it was “his star.” How they made this determination is not stated. Perhaps there was something about the celestial phenomenon itself that was suggestive of a Jewish personage, but the key was probably Jewish tradition, more specifically the Hebrew Scriptures. In particular, most scholars have correctly detected here an allusion to a messianic oracle of the prophet Balaam, recorded in Numbers 24:17. In this prophetic word the seer from Mesopotamia (Deut. 23:4) foresaw that in the distant future “a star shall come [Hebrew; the Greek Septuagint (LXX) reads “a star shall rise”] out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel.” (We will explore this prophecy in detail in
chapter 8
.)

Matthew's account makes it clear that the Magi had seen something extraordinary back in their homeland, something that engendered in them a certainty that the Jewish Messiah had been born. At the same time, the revelation they had was limited, for they did not know at this time where precisely within Judea the baby king was. Indeed they may have assumed that he would be in Jerusalem.

The Star's rising.
The astronomical wonder that had convinced the Magi that the Messiah had recently been born in Judea occurred “at [the Star's] rising” (Matt. 2:2).
55

The Greek word
anatol
ē
could theoretically refer either to a celestial entity's nightly rise above the horizon
or
to its first rising above the eastern horizon just prior to
dawn.
56
Once every year, fixed stars (other than those in close proximity to the poles), after disappearing from the night sky for a period, reappear low in the eastern sky just before the Sun rises at dawn. When the Sun is still some distance under the horizon (how far depends on the entity's brightness, location, and other factors), the object makes a brief appearance before its light is overwhelmed by the light of the sunrise. This is called a heliacal rising, and in ancient times it was considered the most important regular event in the career of a fixed star or constellation.
57
In the case of a fixed star, the heliacal rising occurs annually on one particular day. In the case of a constellation, it obviously stretches out over a longer period, the precise duration depending on the size of the constellation and the brightness of its stars. With respect to “wandering stars” like planets, heliacal risings do not occur at one particular set time each year, but according to a different, more complicated schedule, depending on the planet's orbital course. As regards comets, generally they are capable of heliacally rising in the eastern sky only whenever they are in the inner solar system
58
(whether their return is every four years or every million years) and when their orbit takes them into conjunction with the Sun and then to its east side, from Earth's perspective. Because comets are not point sources but rather extended objects, technically they heliacally rise over a period of time, like constellations. In ancient Bab­ylo­nian and Chinese comet reports, however, the focus was on the coma or “head” (that is, the sunward part of the comet) and hence a report of a comet's heliacal rising would most naturally refer to its coma. Of course, the date of a heliacal rising was strongly dependent on the weather.
59

It seems clear that
anatol
ē
in Matthew 2:2 is referring to a heliacal rising rather than a standard nightly rising.
60
The fact that the Magi even mention the context of the Star's display (“at its rising”) strongly favors the view that this is significant information that played a key part in their assessment of the astronomical phenomenon. It is unclear what that significance could be if it were merely the Star's nightly rising. Moreover, since the Magi (and Matthew, the narrator) employ the possessive article—“at
its
rising”—it is evident that a distinctive occasion in the Star's career is in mind. One should also observe that ordinary, nightly risings of stars, signs, and constellations over the horizon had no astro
logical importance, whereas heliacal risings could be perceived to have great astrological significance. Ancient astrologers developed horoscopes based on the zodiacal sign that had been heliacally rising at the point when a client was born.
61
Of course, low over the eastern horizon shortly before dawn, a celestial body is seen in the context of a heliacally rising sign and constellation. Particularly if the Star was within the zodiac, it was natural for the Magi to consider the possibility that it might be communicating something of natal significance against the backdrop of the heliacally rising constellation.

In addition, when the Magi mention the Star's rising, they may well be alluding to Balaam's oracle about a star-scepter. Prophesying about the coming of the Messiah, the Mesopotamian seer declared that the messianic star-scepter would “rise.” By this he seems to have been referring to a heliacal rising in the eastern sky (cf. LXX Zech. 6:12; Luke 1:78; 2 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 2:26–28; 22:16). The Magi's apparent allusion to Numbers 24:17 would favor the conclusion that
anatol
ē
in Matthew 2:2 has in view a heliacal rising.

In light of all of this, it is likely that when the Magi mentioned the “rising” of the messianic star, they were thinking not of a daily rising but rather of a heliacal rising, that is, the predawn emergence of the Star over the eastern horizon after having been obscured by the Sun.