Bruce R. Crew<\/b><\/p>\n
Introduction<\/b><\/p>\n
One of the most important geo-political powers in the Ancient Near East during New Testament times was a group of people called the Nabateans. The Nabateans comprised an ancient nomadic tribe whose capital lay at Petra, a red sandstone city situated within the mountains of Edom in southern Transjordan. The geo-political emergence of the Nabateans during New Testament times was largely due to their control of the trade routes between the Far East and the eastern Mediterranean region via the Arabian Peninsula. During their zenith, the Nabateans controlled an area of land whose geographical territories included the Arabian Peninsula\u2019s northwest corner, southern Transjordan\u2019s mountains of Edom and Moabite plateau, Israel\u2019s central and southern Negev, and the Sinai Peninsula.<\/p>\n
Yet despite their importance during New Testament times, there is little information about the Nabateans in New Testament texts, apart from references that pertain to the Apostle Paul\u2019s escape from Damascus following his miraculous conversion to Christ and subsequent travels in Arabia (Acts 9:22\u201325; 2 Cor 11:32; Gal 1:15\u201317). This often leads to a mistaken assumption that the Nabateans played a passive or non-existent role during events surrounding the life of Jesus. However, a careful examination of the geographical information from Biblical and non-Biblical texts, as well as the available archeological evidence, indicates a number of important connections.1 This study involves an exploration of one such connection, the impact made by the Nabateans upon an event often overlooked in Biblical studies, the possible routes taken by the Magi in order to pay homage to the Christ-Child, and their escape from Herod the Great to the land of the Nabateans.<\/p>\n
Bethlehem, birthplace of Jesus, 5.5 mi (9 km) south of Jerusalem, as seen from the north. Author Crew suggests the Magi paid homage to Jesus here, although some time after His birth\u2014perhaps as long as two years later.<\/b><\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 103<\/p>\n
The Location of the Magi\u2019s Visit to the Christ-Child: Bethlehem or Nazareth?<\/b><\/p>\n
The account of Jesus\u2019 birth in Matthew 2 raises a question as to the exact location of the Magi\u2019s visit to Joseph\u2019s family and the Christ-Child. According to Matthew 2, Herod sent the Magi to Bethlehem 5.5 mi (9 km) south of Jerusalem in search of the Christ-Child (Mt 2:8). Following their departure from Jerusalem, the passage states that the star earlier observed by the Magi in the east appeared once again and moved on before them until \u201cit came and stood over where the Child was\u201d (Mt 2:9). The confusion in this passage results from the fact that it does not specifically state that the Magi actually visited the Christ-Child in Bethlehem.<\/p>\n
The problem is also compounded by additional information in Luke 2 that states that Joseph and his family returned to the city of Nazareth in Galilee after performing everything according to the \u201cLaw of the Lord\u201d (Lk 2:39). The fulfillment of Jewish religious law by Joseph and Mary would have included Jesus\u2019 circumcision eight days after His birth (Gn 17:12; Lv 12:3) and His dedication at the temple in Jerusalem following the required period of 40 days for Mary\u2019s rite of purification (Ex 13:2; Nm 3:13; 8:17; Lv 5:11; 12:8). Thus an apparent discrepancy exists somewhere between the 40th day when Jesus\u2019 dedication took place at the temple in Jerusalem and the Magi\u2019s visit when Jesus was approximately two years old (Mt 2:16; Lk 2:23\u201324, 39).<\/p>\n
However, there are a number of important clues in the accounts of Jesus\u2019 birth in Matthew 2 and Luke 2 that point to the town of Bethlehem in Judea-Idumea as the probable location for the Magi\u2019s visit to Jesus and His family, rather than the city of Nazareth in Galilee. First, the account in Matthew 2 clearly distinguishes between the town of Bethlehem in the tribal territory of Judah and another town of Bethlehem in lower Galilee belonging to the tribal territory of Zebulon, an area that includes the city of Nazareth (Mt. 2:1; Jos 19:10\u201316; Aharoni and Avi-Yonah 1993: 62\u201363; Carson 1984:83). In fact, the Matthew 2 account specifically mentions the location of the town of Bethlehem in the tribal territory of Judah a total of three times prior to the phrase that the star \u201cstopped over the place where the Child was\u201d (Mt 2:1, 5, 6, 9).<\/p>\n
Second, the Greek word hou<\/i> for \u201cwhere\u201d used in the phrase \u201cstopped over the place where the Child was,\u201d appears 54 times in New Testament texts (Bachman and Salby 1980: 1391\u201392). In 24 of these occurrences, hou<\/i> denotes the idea or concept of a geographic location, place name, position, or state of existence within an area of space (Thomas 1981:1225-32,1359-74,1671).2 In all but one of these 24 occurrences, the syntactical pattern for the portion of the sentence in which hou<\/i> appears begins with a noun or place name that denotes a specific location. Then the noun or place name is followed by the adverbial phrase hou,<\/i> after which a verbal description takes place designating an action that is associated with this specific location.<\/p>\n
Manger Square and the entrance to the Church of the Nativity, the traditional birth place of Jesus.<\/b><\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 104<\/p>\n
The only exception from these 24 appearances in which this does not take place is the appearance of hou<\/i> in Matthew 2:9. However, since the account in Matthew 2 already mentions the town of Bethlehem in the tribal territory of Judah on three occasions prior to the phrase that the star \u201cstopped over the place where the Child was,\u201d it is likely that the author did not feel the need to mention this same location or place name a fourth time. The use of hou<\/i> as an adverbial reference to designate this same location or place name would have sufficed and thus the reader would have likely understood hou<\/i> as an adverbial term denoting the town of Bethlehem in the tribal territory of Judah, from the context of what appears in the preceding verses.<\/p>\n
The account in Luke 2 also states that the shepherds who worshiped the Christ-Child in Bethlehem following His birth did not remain silent about what they saw and heard during that eventful night, but shared this information with others living in the town and the surrounding vicinity (Lk 2:17\u201318). Thus it is likely that those living in the town of Bethlehem knew the location where Jesus and His parents were staying, and were able to direct the Magi to the house itself (Carson 1984: 88\u201389).<\/p>\n
Third, it is important to note that the town of Bethlehem in the tribal territory of Judah lies only 75 mi (120 km) from Judea-Idumea\u2019s border with Egypt. Thus its location as the probable site for the Magi\u2019s visit to Jesus and His family makes better sense in the geographical context of Matthew 2, which details the flight of Joseph\u2019s family to Egypt, as opposed to the city of Nazareth in Galilee. The city of Nazareth in Galilee rests a considerably greater distance away from the city of Jerusalem and the border of Judea-Idumea with Egypt, which would have made for a considerably longer trip (Carson 1984: 91).<\/p>\n
Fourth, the main theme in Luke 2 focuses upon the faithfulness and adherence of Jesus\u2019 parents to Jewish religious law in the context of His normal growth from a child into adulthood as the object of God\u2019s grace (Lk 2:40, 52). However, the main theme in Matthew 2 places the flight of Joseph\u2019s family in the context of the fulfillment of Jewish Old Testament prophecy (Liefeld 1984: 850). Thus there is a greater emphasis in Matthew 2 upon the Scriptural fulfillment of Jesus\u2019 birth through His ascendance from the ancestral line of David in the town of Bethlehem situated in Judea-Idumea that makes better sense from a geographical standpoint than the city of Nazareth in Galilee (Bauer 1979: 59; Flusser 1998: 26).<\/p>\n
Fifth, the meaning of the term \u201cLaw\u201d as it appears in the phrase \u201cLaw of the Lord\u201d in Luke 2:39 originates from a Hebrew verb whose root (yrh<\/i>) represents a word in archery circles denoting the idea \u201cto aim at a mark and hit it\u201d (Garr 2005: 7). Moreover, while the Greek mindset displays a greater interest in the \u201cform or structure\u201d of a given object throughout the writings of the Old and New Testaments, the Hebrew mindset seeks to depict that same object in the context of its main \u201cfunction.\u201d Thus the Greek perspective answers the question \u201cWhat is it?\u201d about a particular object while the Hebrew perspective asks the question \u201cWhat does it do?\u201d for this same object (Wagner 2005: 9).<\/p>\n
The main function of the term \u201cLaw\u201d as it appears in Hebrew, then, refers to the broader idea or concept of \u201cinstruction\u201d or \u201cwords of insight from a wise Father\u201d rather than the mere fulfillment of ritual religious obligation or regulation. While the phrase \u201cLaw of the Lord\u201d certainly includes the idea of ritual religious obligation or regulation in Jewish religious law, it is not strictly limited to this meaning alone. It also embraces the idea or concept of instruction for God\u2019s divinely chosen people from the entire body of the Hebrew Scriptures (Tanakh<\/i>), despite the fact that the primary source for this divine knowledge originates from the first five books (Torah<\/i>) of the Old Testament (Garr 2005: 7).<\/p>\n
Therefore, the meaning of the term \u201cLaw \u201c in the phrase \u201cLaw of the Lord\u201d in Luke 2 can better be translated to mean \u201cinstruction\u201d or \u201cdirection\u201d in terms of its original meaning in Jewish religious law. The meaning and purpose of the phrase \u201cLaw of the Lord\u201d can also be expanded to include the obedience of Joseph and Mary to God\u2019s \u201cinstruction\u201d or \u201cdirection\u201d in every aspect of Jewish religious life. This would include God\u2019s \u201cinstruction\u201d or \u201cdirection\u201d in Matthew 2 through an angel of the Lord for Joseph to flee with the Child and His mother to Egypt, as well as the angel\u2019s instructions to Joseph in another dream to return to the land of Israel after Herod\u2019s death, followed by Joseph\u2019s decision to settle in the city of Nazareth in Galilee as opposed to Judea-Idumea in still another dream (Mt 2:13, 19\u201323).<\/p>\n
Sixth, the account in Matthew 2 suggests that after the death of Herod, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and instructed him to return with the Child and His mother to the land of Israel (Mt 2:19\u201320). However, the account specifies that when Joseph and His family entered the land of Israel, Joseph heard that Herod\u2019s son Archelaus now ruled over Judea-Idumea in place of his late father. As a result, Joseph was afraid to enter Judea-Idumea and instead opted to settle with his family in the city of Nazareth in Galilee after being warned by God in still another dream (Mt 2:22\u201323).<\/p>\n
Thus the account in Matthew 2 indicates that Joseph\u2019s first choice for settling his family in the land of Israel following their return from Egypt appears to have been His ancestral home in Judea-Idumea, perhaps in the town of Bethlehem (Carson 1984: 96). This implies that Joseph and his family previously fled from the town of Bethlehem in Judea-Idumea rather than the city of Nazareth in Galilee.<\/p>\n
Seventh, while the account in Luke 2 omits any mention of the flight by Joseph and his family to Egypt, there is a similar omission in the book of Acts that takes place following the Apostle Paul\u2019s conversion and escape from the city of Damascus. An initial glance of the account in Acts 9:26 suggests that Paul immediately returned to Jerusalem following his escape from Damascus. However, Paul writes in his letter to the Galatians that he did not immediately return to Jerusalem but instead traveled to Arabia where he lived for three years before returning once again to the city of Damascus and back to Jerusalem (Gal 1:16\u201318).<\/p>\n
It is important to note, then, that just as Paul traveled to Arabia where he lived for three years before his return once again to the city of Damascus and then back to Jerusalem, so Jesus also traveled from the land of Israel to Egypt and back with His parents. Yet Luke fails to mention the flight to Egypt by Joseph and His family in Luke 2, as well as the Apostle Paul\u2019s sojourn to Arabia following His escape from the city of Damascus in the book of Acts. For whatever reasons, Luke chose not to include either episode in his accounts of New Testament historical events (Mt 2; Gal 1:16\u201318). Yet Luke\u2019s writing style does not exclude their authenticity or historicity, despite the fact that he fails to mention either episode.<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 105<\/p>\n
Possiable routes of the Magi when they came to pay homage to he baby Jesus<\/b><\/p>\n
Therefore, the geographical information found in Matthew 2 and Luke 2 lends credence to the notion that the town of Bethlehem in the tribal territory of Judah comprises the probable location for the Magi\u2019s visit to Jesus and His family. In addition, it is apparent that Joseph and his family remained in Bethlehem of Judea for up to two years following the birth of Jesus. However, by the time of the Magi\u2019s visit to Jesus, Joseph and his family had already moved into a house where the Magi found them. Afterwards, the Magi returned to their home country by another route after being warned by God in a dream not to retrace the steps they had originally taken in order to see Herod in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n
The Magi: Country of Origin and Possible Routes to Bethlehem<\/b><\/p>\n
According to the account in Matthew 2, the Magi who arrived in the city of Jerusalem seeking someone known as the newly born \u201cKing of the Jews\u201d were from the east (Mt 2:1). The term \u201ceast\u201d suggests that the original homeland of the Magi lay somewhere to the east of Jerusalem, perhaps in Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq), Persia (modern-day Iran), or modern-day Yemen in the southwest corner of the Arabian Peninsula (Clark 1996: 3; Wagner 1996:4; Yamauchi 1996:481\u201391). Regardless of its location, however, there is little doubt that the Magi would have needed to pass through the land of the Nabateans in order to reach the city of Jerusalem in Herod\u2019s political and territorial domain.<\/p>\n
The Nabateans\u2019 control of the trade routes that linked the Far East with the eastern Mediterranean region gave them a virtual monopoly over the spice and incense trade that passed through the ancient Near East during New Testament times. If the original homeland of the Magi lay somewhere in Mesopotamia or Persia, then the Magi probably would have had little choice but to obtain their gifts for this newly born King from the Nabateans prior to entering Judea-Idumea (Mt 2:11). On the other hand, if the Magi originally came from the area of modern-day Yemen, then it is likely that they brought their three gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh with them, since that area comprises the only ancient Near Eastern land in which all three of these products were simultaneously produced (Clark 1996: 1\u20133).<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 106<\/p>\n
The Herodium, Herod the Great\u2019s palace-fortress in Judea. Located 7 mi (11 km) south of Jerusalem, the Herodium was one often elaborate fortresses constructed by Herod to control his kingdom and assure his personal safety. The upper cone was artificially constructed on a natural hill to provide additional height and protection. Lying only 2.5 mi (4 km) southeast of Bethlehem, the Herodium comprised a major threat to the Magi in their effort to escape from the area under Herod\u2019s control. Although Josephus records that Herod was buried here with great pomp and ceremony, his grave has never been found.<\/b><\/p>\n
From Mesopotamia or Persia, the shortest and most feasible route to the city of Jerusalem ran northwest along the Euphrates-Tigris lowlands, then westward across the Fertile Crescent\u2019s northern portion, passing through the ancient city of Palmyra. The route then veered southward near the present-day Syrian city of Homs towards the city of Damascus. After passing through Damascus, the route continued southward then westward to Herod\u2019s territorial and political domain in Judea-Idumea.<\/p>\n
However, if the Magi originally came from the area of modern-day Yemen, then they would have traversed the trade route along the western side of the Arabian Peninsula before entering Nabatean territory at the southern trading town of Egra in the Arabian Peninsula\u2019s northwest corner. The route then turned northward towards the Nabatean capital of Petra in southern Transjordan\u2019s mountains of Edom. From Petra, it passed westward across the Negev\u2019s central highlands to the Mediterranean port of Gaza, or northward to the city of Damascus.<\/p>\n
The account in Matthew 2 specifically states that the Magi stopped in Jerusalem to acquire additional information on the location of the Christ-Child before continuing on their way to pay homage to Him in Bethlehem. If the original homeland of the Magi lay in Yemen, then it is safe to assume that the Magi continued northward from the Nabatean capital at Petra towards the city of Damascus before turning westward somewhere near the present-day Jordanian capital of Amman. From there, the Magi proceeded to enter Herod\u2019s territory, passing through the town of Jericho in the lower portion of the Jordan Valley while en route to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n
The account in Matthew 2 also indicates that Herod was deeply troubled upon hearing about the Magi from the east seeking a newly born king (Mt 2:3). The title \u2018King of the Jews\u2019 was one that the Roman Emperor Augustus had conferred upon Herod in 37 BC following Herod\u2019s victorious struggle to regain control of Judea-Idumea from the Parthians. Prior to the appearance of the Magi in Jerusalem, Herod\u2019s forces clashed with the Nabateans on numerous occasions during the reign of Malchus II. Therefore, the fact that the Magi had just traversed the geographical domain of the Nabateans prior to reaching Jerusalem likely would not have escaped Herod\u2019s attention.<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 107<\/p>\n
In light of these recent military conflicts between Herod and Malchus II, then, Herod had good reason to be suspicious of anyone who had recently passed through the land of the Nabateans seeking a newly born \u201cKing of the Jews.\u201d Information from non-New Testament sources shows that Herod was so jealous of anyone posing the slightest threat to his rule that he even executed members of his own family, including potential heirs to his throne.3 <\/p>\n
In fact, Herod\u2019s reputation as a brutal and oppressive king reached such proportions that the Roman Emperor Augustus once commented that he would prefer to be one of Herod\u2019s pigs rather than one of Herod\u2019s sons! The expression by Augustus represents a pun or word play on the terms \u201cson\u201d (huios<\/i>) and \u201cpig\u201d (hys<\/i>), words that sound similar to one another in Greek (Brown 1993: 226). Thus it can be said that the Emperor Augustus viewed the life of one of Herod\u2019s pigs to be safer from Herod\u2019s wrath as opposed to the life of one of Herod\u2019s own sons.<\/p>\n
Herod also belonged to a group of people known as the Idu-means, the surviving remnant of the ancient Edomites. Their religious conversion to Judaism took place following the conquest of their homeland in the southern portion of the Judean hill country and northern Negev by the Jewish Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus I in 112 BC. Therefore, although Herod was legitimately Jewish according to Jewish religious law, nevertheless the vast majority of the Judean-Idumeans resented Herod because they viewed him as an outsider.4 The fact that Herod\u2019s mother originated from a prominent family of the Nabatean royal court at Petra further diminished his popularity inside Judea-Idumea, since his mother came from an ethnic group that was viewed by the majority of people in Judea-Idumea as religious pagans.5 <\/p>\n
As a result, Herod was so obsessed with maintaining his political grip over Judea-Idumea that he was afraid of anyone who posed the slightest threat to his rule. This included a seemingly innocent Child sought by the Magi as the newly born \u201cKing of the Jews,\u201d the long-awaited Jewish Messiah according to Old Testament texts. The account in Matthew 2 states that Herod spared nothing in his efforts to discover the exact identity and location of this newly born King. Herod first assembled the Jewish chief priests and scribes in Jerusalem to ask them where this promised Messiah was supposed to be born (Mt 2:4). Then Herod summoned the Magi in secret to ascertain the exact time they had seen His star in the east, to determine the Child\u2019s approximate age. Finally, Herod sent the Magi on their way to Bethlehem in search of this Child, ordering them to report back to him after they had found Him, pretending that he too was interested in worshipping this newly born \u201cKing of the Jews.\u201d<\/p>\n
View of the Judean wilderness, looking east. Visible in the distance is the Lisan peninsula at the southern end of the Dead Sea. The Magi may have passed through this area on their return from visiting Jesus.<\/b><\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 108<\/p>\n
Such pretense was highly typical of Herod. Herod\u2019s acting abilities included the donning of clever disguises to conceal his true identity and ulterior motives, actions that frequently led him to turn even on his own friends.6 As a result, members of devout Jewish religious groups such as the Pharisees were afraid to whisper even the slightest word about their intense dislike for Herod out of fear that they too would end up becoming a target of Herod\u2019s wrath.7 The New Testament account of Jesus\u2019 birth in Matthew 2, then, clearly attests to Herod\u2019s duplicitous nature and his superb acting skills in order to disguise his true intentions from the Magi (Mt 2:8).<\/p>\n
Nabatean-Judean Idumean Relations: Archaeological Evidence of Cultural Ties<\/b><\/p>\n
The account in Matthew 2 states that the Magi used a different route to return to their home country after being warned by an angel in a dream not to return to Herod (Mt 2:12). Thus the Magi did not retrace their earlier steps to the city of Jerusalem, and would have avoided the routes that ran eastward toward Jericho and\/or northward from Jerusalem toward Damascus, an area that was under Herod\u2019s control. If such had been the case, it would have been relatively easy for Herod to sound the alarm and summon his forces to overtake the Magi before they could safely escape from Judea-Idumea after they failed to report back to Herod following their visit to Bethlehem.<\/p>\n
This suggests that, following their departure from Bethlehem, the Magi either traveled southward and\/or eastward towards the closest territorial and political domain outside Herod\u2019s control. The most viable location to which the Magi would have fled would have been the land of the Nabateans. Information from archeological discoveries provides abundant evidence that there were strong cultural and political ties among the Nabateans, Judeans and Idumeans during New Testament times. For example, the cornucopia symbol on ancient Near Eastern coins originates from coins that were minted in Nabatea and Judea-Idumea between the second and first centuries BC (Mesheror 1975: 9). The largest Nabatean coin hoard ever uncovered, dating from the middle to the end of the first century AD, was found in Wadi Murraba\u2019at, an area located inside Judea-Idumea (Mesheror 1975: 9).<\/p>\n
The Nabateans, Judeans and Idumeans also employed similar practices of secondary burial (Negev 1971: 121\u201329). The necropolis in the southernmost Nabatean trading city of Egra in the Arabian Peninsula\u2019s northwest corner displays a tomb belonging to a Jewish family that lived there in the first century AD (Negev 1976:213\u201318). Other similarities exist between seal impressions that have been uncovered in the necropolis of the Nabatean city of Mampsis in the Negev\u2019s northeast portion (Negev 1971:110\u201329) and seal impressions discovered at the Judean desert caves inside Judea-Idumea (Yadin 1971).<\/p>\n
Archeological excavations at Jerusalem, Qumran and Masada in Judea-Idumea further reveal simpler versions of the Nabatean staircase tower closely resembling the ones excavated at the Nabatean capital of Petra, as well as at other Nabatean sites in the Negev (Negev 1972: 29). The staircase towers date to the reign of the Hasmonean ruler Alexander Jannaeus between the second and first centuries BC. Excavations at Masada have uncovered a number of Nabatean capitals on structures that date to Herod the Great\u2019s reign (37\u201334 BC; Negev 1973: 380).<\/p>\n
The material culture of the Nabateans also features a delicate ceramic ware known as Nabatean \u201cpainted ware\u201d or \u201ceggshell pottery.\u201d This distinctive ware has been discovered at sites in Judea-Idumea, including Herod\u2019s fortress at Masada (Yadin 1966: 15\u201316) and the citadel courtyard of Jerusalem\u2019s Old City (Amiran and Eitan 1970: 15\u201316). The latter dates to the period of the first Jewish Revolt during the first century AD, while that from Masada dates to the reign of Herod the Great.<\/p>\n
An imitation version of Nabatean ware called \u201cpseudo-Nabatean\u201d or \u201cJerusalem\u201d pottery has also been uncovered at sites inside Judea-Idumea, including Herod\u2019s fortresses at Masada (Hershovitz 1979), Herodium (Houston 1979) and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem\u2019s Old City (Avigad 1976: 21).<\/p>\n
The so-called \u201cHerodium lamp\u201d comprises still another example of ceramic ware that dates to the reign of Herod the Great that has been found at sites inside Nabatea and Judea-Idumea. These sites include a Nabatean tomb in Amman (Harding 1946: 60\u201362), the Nabatean potter\u2019s workshop at Avdat in the Negev\u2019s Central Highlands (Rosenthal and Sivan 1976: 80, 82; Negev 1974: 27\u201328) and the Nabatean capital at Petra (Zayadine 1979: 188, 288).<\/p>\n
Nabatean inscriptions have also been found in Judea-Idumea, Galilee and the Hauran portion of the Golan Heights region, areas that were controlled by Herod\u2019s sons, Herod Antipas and Phillip, during New Testament times. One from the Hauran discovered in the early 20th century attributes the title \u201ctetrarch of Aurantis\u201d to Herod Antipas\u2019 half-brother Phillip (Offord 1919: 82\u201385). A written Nabatean contract uncovered at the site of Qumran near the northwestern corner of the Dead Sea originates from the period of Herod the Great\u2019s reign. This contract displays a number of phrases similar to ones originating from sources dating to the period of Judaism\u2019s Talmudic writings that begin in the second-third centuries AD (Starcky 1964: 161\u201381; Rabbinowitz 1955: 11\u201314). A Nabatean incantation text found inside Judea-Idumea also provides evidence of friendly ties between Nabateans, Judeans and Idumeans during New Testament times (Naveh 1979: 111\u201319).<\/p>\n
The Nahal Hever papyri discovered in Judea-Idumea further include documents outlining water and property rights for Jews who lived in the Nabatean town of Zoar near the Dead Sea\u2019s southeastern portion during the reign of Rabbel II (AD 70\u2013106), the last known Nabatean king (Yadin 1971: 230\u201346; 1962: 240\u20134). The Nahal Hever papyri contain references to a court of law in the Nabatean capital of Petra, as well as links between Nabateans and Jews who lived in the town of Ein-Gedi, situated along the western shore of the Dead Sea in Judea-Idumea (Yadin 1971: 240, 244, 246\u201357). The continuous presence of a Jewish community that lived in the Nabatean town of Zoar is also well attested through Islamic times (Goitein 1975: 125).<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 109<\/p>\n
In addition, the Nahal Hever papyri provide a definitive link between Jewish settlements inside Judea-Idumea and irrigated agricultural terraces within Nabatea from Rabbel II\u2019s reign. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote during the first century AD, points to possible links in agricultural development between Nabateans, Judeans and Idumeans that may date back to the reign of Alexander Jannaeus between the second and first centuries BC.8 The discovery of ancient runoff farms at sites that collected and stored floodwaters in Nabatea and Judea-Idumea further indicates that there were possible exchanges in agricultural and water conservation techniques between these three peoples during earlier times. These runoff farms in the Negev\u2019s Central Highlands and Judean desert\u2019s Buqe\u2019ah Valley region in Judea-Idumea date to earlier Israelite settlement between the 11th and seventh centuries BC (Evenari, Shanan and Tadmor 1982; Crew 1981: 261\u201373; Stager 1976; 1975).<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 110<\/p>\n
Machaerus, another of Herod\u2019s fortress-palaces. Located 31 mi (50 km) southwest of Amman, it was one of two fortresses Herod constructed east of the Dead Sea. Machaerus was located roughly 1\/3 of the way down the east side of the Dead Sea, whereas the other, Esbus, was located 18 mi (29 km) east of the northern end of the Dead Sea. These fortresses would have seriously impeded the Magi had they chosen to travel through Transjordan on their way home.<\/b><\/p>\n
The Magi\u2019s Escape Route from Bethlehem to the Land of the Nabateans<\/b><\/p>\n
The Expositor\u2019s Bible Commentary<\/i> on the gospel of Matthew mentions two possible escape routes that the Magi could have used to reach the land of the Nabateans from the town of Bethlehem (Carson 1984: 89). The first route would have taken the Magi southward along the main ridge of the Judean hill country to the town of Hebron. From Hebron the Magi would have descended into the northern Negev town of Beersheba via the Hatorayim ridge and moved southward into the Negev\u2019s central highlands to link up with the main caravan route that connected the Mediterranean port at Gaza with the Nabatean capital at Petra. However, this route likely would have taken somewhere between two to four days for the Magi to traverse on foot and\/or by camel, and, in all likelihood, this would have provided enough time for Herod to sound the alarm and have his forces overtake them.<\/p>\n
The second route would have taken the Magi northeastward from the town of Bethlehem through the Buqe\u2019ah Valley portion of the Judean desert, thus allowing them to bypass the city of Jerusalem and link up with the road leading from Jerusalem to the city of Jericho in the Jordan river valley (Stager 1975: 174, 177, 185). From Jericho the Magi could have traveled along the Dead Sea\u2019s eastern shore in the territory known as Perea until they reached the safety of Nabatean territory after crossing the Arnon river valley in the Dead Sea\u2019s southeast portion. Or the Magi could have retraced their steps and reconnected with the main north-south route passing through the Transjordanian highlands near the modern-day city of Amman. From there they would have traveled southward towards the Nabatean capital at Petra, via ancient Moab. However, neither option likely would have provided a safe escape from Judea-Idumea into Nabatean territory before Herod\u2019s forces could have overtake them. In addition, the location of Herod\u2019s fortress at Machaerus along the Dead Sea\u2019s northeast portion would have placed a formidable obstacle in the path of the Magi\u2019s efforts to reach Nabatean territory.<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 111<\/p>\n
In light of the fact that the Magi were faced with a narrow window of time to slip past Herod\u2019s fortifications, there is a third route that they probably used. It is mentioned in Old Testament texts in conjunction with the invasion of Judah by an alliance of Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites during the reign of Jehoshaphat (1 Chr 20:1\u201330). This route likely would have allowed the Magi to safely reach the land of the Nabateans before Herod\u2019s forces could overtake them. Moreover, just as the Magi acquired information on the possible whereabouts of the Christ-Child and His family in the town of Bethlehem from local people living in the area, it is also likely that the Magi inquired about the shortest possible route from Bethlehem to the land of the Nabateans from these same people (Carson 1984: 89). Such information that the Magi received from the local population would have proved vital in their efforts to successfully escape Herod\u2019s forces since the Magi were complete strangers to the territory of Judea-Idumea (Carson 1984: 88\u201389).<\/p>\n
This third route would have taken the Magi eastward from the town of Bethlehem past Herod\u2019s Herodium fortress near Tekoa, and across the Judean desert via the wilderness of Jeruel to the ascent of Ziz above the Dead Sea\u2019s western shore (1 Chr 20:1\u201330). From there, the Magi could have descended into the town of Ein-Gedi and moved towards the safety of Nabatean territory in one of two possible directions. The Magi could have taken a boat eastward from the harbor at Ein-Gedi, crossed the Dead Sea and landed safely somewhere in Nabatean territory along the Dead Sea\u2019s southeastern shore (Hadas 1993: 45\u201349). This would have enabled the Magi to avoid Herod\u2019s fortress at Machaerus along the Dead Sea\u2019s northeast corner in the territory of Perea, whose borders extended southward to the northern side of the Arnon river valley (Aharoni and Avi-Yonah 1993:217, 221). Alternatively, the Magi could have traveled southward from the town of Ein-Gedi along the Dead Sea\u2019s western shore and passed safely into Nabatean territory somewhere near the town of Zoar along the Dead Sea\u2019s southeast corner.<\/p>\n
Masada, the most famous of Herod\u2019s fortresses. A popular tourist attraction today, Masada would have posed a major threat to the Magi if they decided to travel around the southern end of the Dead Sea after leaving Bethlehem.<\/b><\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 112<\/p>\n
The land route along the Dead Sea\u2019s western shore south from Ein-Gedi towards the Nabatean town of Zoar would have added an additional six to eight hr of travel on foot and\/or by camel. In addition, the location of Herod\u2019s fortress at Masada near a crucial point along the Dead Sea\u2019s southwest corner would have been a major obstacle to the Magi in their effort to reach the relative safety of Nabatean territory near the town of Zoar. According to estimated projections of water levels that were present for the Dead Sea during this period (Neev and Emery 1967:33), the location of Herod\u2019s fortress at Masada would have been directly in the path of the Magi\u2019s escape route.<\/p>\n
This third route takes 10 and 12 hr to traverse on foot and\/or by camel.9 In all likelihood, this would have allowed the Magi to safely slip past Herod\u2019s Herodium fortress and make it to the town of Ein-Gedi before Herod could sound the alarm. Then it would have probably taken upwards of several more hours for the Magi to cross the Dead Sea by boat.<\/p>\n
According to early historical sources, the Nabateans could successfully navigate the Dead Sea by late in the fourth century BC.10 By sometime late in the first century BC, then, it is likely that the Nabateans had developed an efficient means of crossing the Dead Sea by boat. Archeologists have uncovered a series of harbors along the Dead Sea\u2019s western shore, including one at Ein-Gedi, that dates to Hellenistic and Hasmonean times and likely was still in operation in New Testament times (Bar-Adon 1981:349\u201352; Hadas 1993:45\u201349; 1989:68\u201372). The route eastward from Bethlehem past Herod\u2019s Herodium fortress to across the Dead Sea by boat would have probably required 16 to 20 hr to traverse. Crossing the Dead Sea by boat would thus seem to have been the more likely route of escape.<\/p>\n
Summary and Conclusions<\/b><\/p>\n
Since the town of Bethlehem is only a few miles south of Jerusalem, it is likely that by the time the Magi reached the town of Ein-Gedi, Herod would have known that he had been tricked (Carson 1984: 94). As a result, Herod would have sounded the alarm and alerted his forces via a system of mirror and\/or smoke signals to be on the lookout for the Magi.11 This suggests that the Magi probably took the fastest and most direct route out of Judea-Idumea to reach the safety of Nabatean territory. This would mean that following their departure from Bethlehem the Magi quickly passed by Herod\u2019s Herodium fortress, crossed the Judean desert and descended into Ein-Gedi. From the harbor at Ein-Gedi, the Magi then crossed the Dead Sea by boat and reached the safety of Nabatean territory somewhere along the Dead Sea\u2019s southeast shore.<\/p>\n
This examination of the possible routes used by the Magi to travel to the town of Bethlehem and to successfully escape from Herod\u2019s forces has required a better understanding of the role of the neighboring Nabateans during New Testament times. Moreover, it provides some deeper insight into the spatial and temporal context of those historical events. Additional studies are needed to develop a clearer understanding of the geographical and historical role played by the Nabateans at other points in the life and ministry of Jesus, and during the development of early Christianity in the ancient Near East.<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 18:4 (Fall 2005) p. 113<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/b><\/p>\n
Aharoni, Yohanan and Avi-Yonah, Michael<\/b><\/p>\n
1993 The Macmillan Bible Atlas,<\/i> ed. Anson F. Rainey and Ze\u2019ev Safrai, third ed. New York: Macmillan.<\/p>\n
Amiran, Ruth, and Eitan, Avraham<\/b><\/p>\n
1970 Excavations in the Courtyard of the Citadel, Jerusalem, 1968\u20131969 (Preliminary Report). Israel Exploration Journal<\/i> 20:9\u201317.<\/p>\n
Avigad, Nahman<\/b><\/p>\n
1976 Archeological Discoveries in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.<\/i> Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.<\/p>\n
Bachman, H., and Salby, Wolfgang A.<\/b><\/p>\n
1980 Computer-Konkordanz zum Novum Testamentum Graece von Nestle-Aland, 26, Auflage, und zum Greek New Testament,<\/i> third ed. Berlin: DeGruyter.<\/p>\n
Bar-Adon, Pesach<\/b><\/p>\n
1981 The Hasmonean Fortresses and the Status of Khirbet Qumran. Eretz Israel<\/i> 15: 349\u201352 (Hebrew).<\/p>\n
Bauer, Walter.<\/b><\/p>\n
1979 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.<\/i> Trans. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, from German. Chicago: University of Chicago.<\/p>\n
Brown, Raymond E.<\/b><\/p>\n
1993 The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke,<\/i> second edition. New York: Doubleday.<\/p>\n
Carson, Donald A.<\/b><\/p>\n
1984 Matthew. Pp 1\u2013599 in The Expositor\u2019s Bible Commentary<\/i> 8, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan.<\/p>\n
Clark, Bill<\/b><\/p>\n
1996 Gold, Frankincense, and Myrrh: The First Christmas Gifts, Bridges for Peace, http:\/\/www. bridgesforpeace. com\/featgft4.html,<\/i> (accessed December 5).<\/p>\n
Crew, Bruce R.<\/b><\/p>\n
1981 A Geo-Political History of the Negev and its Role in Possible Jewish Contributions to the Area\u2019s Runoff Agriculture: Israelite through Nabatean Times.<\/i> Unpublished MA Thesis, Jerusalem University College.<\/p>\n
Diodorus<\/b><\/p>\n
1988 Diodorus of Sicily.<\/i> Trans. Russel M. Geer, Charles H. Oldfather and Francis R. Walton, from Greek. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge MA: Harvard University.<\/p>\n
Evenari, Michael; Shanan, Leslie; and Tadmor, Naphtali<\/b><\/p>\n
1982 The Negev: Challenge of a Desert,<\/i> second ed. Cambridge: Harvard University.<\/p>\n
Flusser, David, and Notley, Steven R.<\/b><\/p>\n
1998 Jesus.<\/i> Jerusalem: Magnes.<\/p>\n
Garr, John D.<\/b><\/p>\n
2005 Lamed: The Tallest Letter. Israel Teaching Letter,<\/i> July, Bridges for Peace, http:\/\/www.bridgesforpeace.com\/modules.php?name=news& file=article&sid=2270.<\/p>\n
Goitein, Shelomo D.<\/b><\/p>\n
1975 A Court Record on the Dead Sea. Eretz Israel<\/i> 12: 200\u2013202 (Hebrew, with English summary p. 125).<\/p>\n
Hadas, Gideon<\/b><\/p>\n
1989 Ein-Gedi Beach? Hadashot Arkheologiyot<\/i> 94: 68\u201372 (Hebrew).<\/p>\n
1993 Where was the Harbor of En-Gedi Situated? Israel Exploration Journal<\/i> 43: 45\u201349.<\/p>\n
Harding, Lawrence<\/b><\/p>\n
1946 A Nabatean Tomb at Ammon. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine<\/i> 12: 58\u201362.<\/p>\n
Hershovitz, Malkah<\/b><\/p>\n
1979 Personal communication, October 1979.<\/p>\n
Hirschberg, Haim Z.<\/b><\/p>\n
1975 New Jewish Inscriptions in the Nabatean Sphere. Eretz Israel<\/i> 12: 142\u201348 (Hebrew, with English summary p. 123).<\/p>\n
Houston, Elizabeth<\/b><\/p>\n
1979 Personal communication, October 1979.<\/p>\n
Josephus, Flavius<\/b><\/p>\n
1988a Jewish Antiquities.<\/i> Trans. H.J. Thackery and R. Marcus, from Greek. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge MA: Harvard University.<\/p>\n
1988b Jewish Wars<\/i> Trans. H.J. Thackery and R. Marcus, from Greek. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge MA: Harvard University.<\/p>\n
Liefeld, Walter L.<\/b><\/p>\n
1984 Luke. Pp 797\u20131059 in The Expositor\u2019s Bible Commentary<\/i> 8, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan.<\/p>\n
Mesheror, Yaacov<\/b><\/p>\n
1975 Nabatean Coins. Qedem Monographs of the Hebrew University Institute of Archeology<\/i> 3. Jerusalem: Ahava.<\/p>\n
Naveh, Joseph<\/b><\/p>\n
1979 A Nabatean Incantation Text. Israel Exploration Journal<\/i> 29: 111\u201319.<\/p>\n
Neev, David, and Emery, Kenneth O.<\/b><\/p>\n
1967 The Dead Sea: Depositional Processes and Environments of Evaporites.<\/i> Jerusalem: Ministry of Development Geological Survey.<\/p>\n
Negev, Avraham<\/b><\/p>\n
1971 Nabatean Necropolis of Mampsis. Israel Exploration Journal<\/i> 21: 110\u201329.<\/p>\n
1972 Staircase Tower in Nabatean Architecture. Eretz Israel<\/i> 11: 197\u2013207 (Hebrew, with English summary p. 29).<\/p>\n
1973 The Staircase Tower in Nabatean Architecture. Revue Biblique<\/i> 80: 364\u2013383.<\/p>\n
1974 The Nabatean Potter\u2019s Workshop at Oboda.<\/i> Bonn: Verlag.<\/p>\n
1976 The Nabatean Necropolis of Egra. Revue Biblique<\/i> 83: 203\u201336.<\/p>\n
Offord, J.<\/b><\/p>\n
1919 Nabatean Inscription Concerning Phillip, Tetrarchy of Aurantis. Palestinian Exploration Quarterly<\/i> 51: 82\u201385.<\/p>\n
Rabbinowitz, Joseph J.<\/b><\/p>\n
1955 A Clue to the Nabatean Contract from the Dead Sea Region. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research<\/i> 139: 11\u201314.<\/p>\n
Rosenthal, Renate, and Sivan, Renae<\/b><\/p>\n
1978 Ancient Lamps in the Schloessinger Collection. Qedem Monographs of the Hebrew University Institute of Archeology<\/i> 8. Jerusalem: Ahava.<\/p>\n
Stager, Lawrence E.<\/b><\/p>\n
1975 Ancient Agriculture in the Judean Desert: A Case Study of the Buqe\u2019ah Valley in the Iron Age.<\/i> Unpublished PhD. Dissertation, Harvard University.<\/p>\n
1976 Farming in the Judean Desert during the Iron Age. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research<\/i> 221: 145\u201358.<\/p>\n
Starcky, Jeanne C.<\/b><\/p>\n
1964 Un Contrat Nabateen Sur Papyrus. Revue Biblique<\/i> 61: 161\u201381.<\/p>\n
Thomas, Robert L.<\/b><\/p>\n
1981 New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible: [including] Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries.<\/i> Nashville TN: Holman.<\/p>\n
Wagner, Clarence H., Jr.<\/b><\/p>\n
1996 Christmas: A New Look at an Old Story. Accessed from http:\/\/www.bridgesforpeace.com\/featgft4.html<\/i> December 5, now stored in the organization\u2019s archives. Copies of the article are available upon request from: Bridges for Peace, PMB33145, 5103 South Sheridan Ave., Tulsa OK 74145\u20137627.<\/p>\n
2005 The Land of the Bible Experience. Bridges for Peace Dispatch from Jerusalem<\/i> 30.3: 10\u201313.<\/p>\n
Yadin, Yigael<\/b><\/p>\n
1962 Expedition D\u2014Cave of the Letters. Israel Exploration Journal<\/i> 12: 227\u201357.<\/p>\n
1966 Masada.<\/i> Trans. Moshe Pearlman, from Hebrew. New York: Random House.<\/p>\n
1971 Bar Kochba.<\/i> Jerusalem: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.<\/p>\n
Yamauchi, Edwin M.<\/b><\/p>\n
1996 Persia and the Bible.<\/i> Grand Rapids MI: Baker.<\/p>\n
Zayadine, Fawzi<\/b><\/p>\n
1979 Excavations at Petra (1976 and 1978). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan:<\/i> 22: 185\u201397.<\/p>\n
Bruce R. Crew is a specialist in Biblical geography. He has a PhD in Geography from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, as well as a MDiv From Trinity International University, Deerfield IL. He has taught geography at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay; Ferris State University, Big Rapids MI; as well as at community colleges in Chicago and Michigan.<\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bruce R. Crew Introduction One of the most important geo-political powers in the Ancient Near East during New Testament times was a group of people called the Nabateans. The Nabateans comprised an ancient nomadic tribe whose capital lay at Petra, a red sandstone city situated within the mountains of Edom in southern Transjordan. The geo-political … Continue reading “WHICH
\nWAY DID THEY GO?
\nTHE MAGI\u2019S ESCAPE FROM KING HEROD”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15422","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sermons"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15422","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15422"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15422\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15422"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15422"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15422"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}