CHAPTER 22

MORE ABOUT "HIS STAR".

    In the last chapter we unravelled the astronomy from the Greek text of Matthew chapter 2, and now it’s time to ask a few more questions about "His Star." We begin our enquiry knowing that the Star of Bethlehem was in fact a Planet, and that the Magi were expecting its appearance, its "heliacal rising", and as soon as they had ascertained that their calculations were correct, and that the splendour of the dawn presented them with the vision they anxiously awaited, they made plans to set off for Judæa. This would not have been a hasty process, but one which entailed much preparation, and even then it would take them two or three weeks (as explained in the last chapter) to travel from Babylon to Judæa, by a route which allowed them to stop off for necessary supplies. This route was probably northwards to start with, then across the desert to Mari, then Palmyra, (Tadmor), and finally southwards into the region of Damascus and the land of Israel.

    So much for the background. Now what about that star? The ancient peoples always looked upon Jupiter as the King Star. This is reflected in Greek mythology, where Zeus was the king of the gods, the Roman counterpart being called Jupiter. There could have been no other planet in their minds. The heliacal rising of Jupiter would suggest the birth of a King. But they would not automatically have come to this conclusion without corroborative evidence. This evidence came in two directions -

The knowledge that the "seventy sevens" of years given by Daniel in his writings, was more or less up.

The fact that when Jupiter made its appearance, it rose within the constellation of Leo, and in fact passed very near to the brightest star in that sign, known as Regulus. This star is a "royal star", as the very name suggests, being Latin for a Prince, a King’s Son.

    When the Magi put all these things together, they realised that the conjunction of astronomical events was unquestionably the sign they awaited. The "King Star" (Jupiter), arose close to the "Prince Star" (Regulus) within the Sign of Leo, (between his feet,) associated with the Tribe of Judah, and historically, it was the right moment in time. And so the Star predicted by Balaam had finally shown itself, and this was no ordinary circumstance. It was an event to eclipse all others, and required an ambassadorial visit.

    Now it’s all very well talking like this, but did the event actually happen? Have we any way of confirming or rejecting this suggestion? Thankfully we have available for our use Tables of Planetary, Lunar, and Solar Positions for those years, computed by Bryant Tuckermann, 1964. Some years ago I obtained my own copy of this book and have frequently had occasion to refer to it. It is a most useful tool in historical research, when astronomical data combine with historical records. Computer graphics are of course now available, based on these tables.

    In Tuckermann’s tables for the year in question we find the following facts emerging -

In its heliacal rising, Jupiter was in conjunction with Venus on Monday 12th August, B.C.3

On 17th August B.C.3 Venus was in conjunction with Regulus.

On 12th September B.C.3 Jupiter was in conjunction with Regulus.

The following diagram shows these conjunctions.

 

(Note. Yet another diagram has had to be omitted.)

 

    Other writers have played heavily on the fact that both Venus and Jupiter were in view at this time, and that the significance was that of the conjunction. But Matthew’s account is specific in its mention of "His Star", not "His Stars". Venus had no significance in respect of the birth of the King of Judah, even though it had a significance of its own in another direction, which the Magi would probably not have been aware of.

    I am indebted to Ferrari d’Occhieppo for bringing to my notice an important fact. In his article entitled "The Star of Bethlehem", in the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, (Volume 19, pp 517-520, 1978) he says that "The oldest version of the Protoevangelium of James in the Papyrus Bodmer V (Testuz 1958), apparently reflecting an independent popular tradition about the Magi and their Star, far from being contradictory in itself as astronomically inexperienced scholars believed, attests, in non-technical language, that there were visible two planets rising together while only one of these (arguments taken from other sources are pleading for Jupiter) had been considered as the Messiah’s Star proper by the Magi."

    This author then went on to say that in his opinion it referred to the rising of Jupiter and Saturn in B.C.7, but in my research I find no correlation with his thesis, but the statement about two planets is important because, assuming that our present research is establishing a series of valid correspondences, then the presence of Venus (the brightest "star" in the sky) would have been a very significant fact along with the King Star.

    I would now like to quote from a book by Jack Lindsey, entitled "The Origins of Astrology." I found this a most fascinating volume and read it with great interest, making numerous notes for further use. Lindsey gives plenty of evidence on how the Wise Men of the East viewed astronomical events. It is to these that I now wish to turn, so that the understanding given above about these men may be seen to be in order.

    First of all, about eclipses. Apparently they were viewed as bad omens, and this is of interest in connection with the Lunar Eclipse mentioned by Josephus, occurring just a few days before Herod’s death. Here is the translation of a tablet from the archives of Nineveh. "If an eclipse occurs but it is not observed in the Capital, such an eclipse is considered not to have happened. The Capital means the city in which the King is staying. Now there were clouds everywhere, we do not know whether the eclipse occurred or not. - - - The Great Gods who live in the city of your Majesty have covered up the sky and not shown the eclipse. This is what the King should know, that the eclipse has no relation to your Majesty or his Country. On this account the King should be happy."

   In another text we read about the rising of the planets - "The Sun did not have an eclipse. It let [the computed event] go by. The Planet Venus will reach the sign Virgo; the heliacal rising of the Planet Mercury is near." There are apparently a great number of tablets containing information of this sort, and it shows us how careful these Magi were in their observations. They had obviously computed the times of eclipses, which is more than most of us could achieve! Furthermore, they knew when the Planets were about to ascend in their "heliacal risings". It is only in the area of interpretations that we may find occasional cause for some amusement. But not always. The Magi certainly predicted correctly concerning the birth of Jesus, but as I pointed out before, they were in possession of prophecy, thus giving them a much firmer footing for interpretation.

    Now what about the appearance of Venus in conjunction with Jupiter during those August days in B.C.3? What did the Magi construe when Venus rose heliacally? First of all, Lindsey tells us that the two favourable planets were Jupiter and Venus, and the two unfavourable planets were Mars and Saturn. Mercury was neutral.

    The Planet Venus was thought of as a luminous lion roaming the heavens from east to west. In the morning appearances of Venus it was considered male, and in the evening, female. Hence when Venus was seen in its heliacal rising together with Jupiter in August B.C.3, the interpretation would probably have suggested the arrival of two significant (male) figures on the world stage. The Jupiter rising was clearly understood in terms of the Messiah, but the other figure could be none other than John the Baptist, even though they may never have known anything about him. He was the "luminous lion of the morning sky", the attendant to the King. We can now logically interpret the event in terms of John the Baptist, even though they were ignorant of it.

Jack Finegan, in his revised edition of “Handbook of Biblical Chronology”, has this to say. “On June 17th, B.C.2 Jupiter came again into conjunction with Venus. They were in extremely close conjunction and shone almost like a single bright star in the west – in the direction of Jerusalem as seen from Babylonia..” [Section 550. Page 319] Finegan seems to be in more favour of a B.C.2 birth of Christ than he was in his earlier edition. This came because of the almost unanimous chronologies of the ancient fathers.

    Another timetable may now be constructed, containing these astronomical conjunctions and the data relating to the birth of John the Baptist and Jesus. It is as follows -

Monday May 20th B.C.3 6th Sivan Feast of Pentecost.

Monday June 24th B.C.3 11th Tammuz Conception of John the Baptist.

5th August - 12th September B.C.3 The Magi witness the conjunctions.

Wednesday 25th December B.C.3 18th Tebeth Conception of Jesus.

Wednesday 25th March B.C.2 20th Nisan Birth of John the Baptist.

June 17th, B.C.2 Venus-Jupiter conjunction the West.

Monday 29th September B.C.2 1st Marchesvan Birth of Jesus.

     The first date for the heliacal rising of Jupiter would have been about August 5th B.C.3, and it would have risen within the Sign of Leo for the first time since B.C.87. This explains why this particular rising was considered important, because the previous occasion was far too early to match Daniel’s "70 weeks" prophecy. The next occasion would have been in A.D. 80, and this would have been far too late.