(?a) But even supposing the magi did undertake the journey at the time in question, it seems impossible that the conjunction of December, B.C. 7, can on any reasonable grounds be considered as fulfilling the con- ditions in Matt. ii. 9. The circumstances are as follows : On Dec. 4 the sun set at Jerusalem at 5 P. M. Suppos- ing the magi to have then commenced their journey to Bethlehem, they would first see Jupiter and his dull and somewhat distant companion one and a half hour distant from the meridian in a south-east direction, and decidedly to the cast of Bethlehem. By the time they came to Rachel's tomb (see 'Rohmson. Bihl. Res. ii, 568) the planets would be due south of them on the merid- ian, and no longer over the hill of Bethlehem (see the maps of Van de Velde and of Tobler), for that village (see Robinson, as above) bears from Rachel's tomb S. 5° E.+80 declension = S. 13° E. The road then takes a turn to the east, and ascends the hill near to its west- ern extremity ; the planets, therefore, would now be on their right hands, and a little behind them : the " star," therefore, ceased altogether to go " before them" as a guide. Arrived on the hill and in the village, it be- came physically impossible for the star to stand over any house whatever close to them, seeing that it was now visible far away beyond the hill to the west, and far off in the heavens at an altitude of 57°. As they ad- vanced, the star would of necessity recede, and under no circumstances could it be said to stand "over" {tTra- vo)) any house, unless at the distance of miles from the place where they were. Thus the two heavenly bodies altogether fail to fulfil either of the conditions implied in the words Tvpoi]yti> uvtovq or tara^r) tird- vo), A star, if vertical, would appear to stand over any house or object to which a spectator might chance to be near; but a star at an altitude of 57° could appear to stand over no house or object in the immediate neigh- borhood of the observer. It is scarcely necessary to add that if the magi had left the Jaffa Gate bel'ore sunset, they would not have seen the planets at the outset; and if they had left Jerusalem later, the " star" would have been a more useless guide than before. Thus the beautiful phantasm of Kepler and Ideler which has fas- cinated so many writers vanishes before the more per- fect daylight of investigation, so far as it is proposed for an explanation of the guidance to Bethlehem. The as- tronomical phenomena, however, may have incited them in part to their visit to Judiea.
Kepler's ideas may be found in the essay De Jesu Chi'isti iServatoris Nostri Vero Anno Natulitio, and more fully in De Vero Anno quo yEternus Dei Filius llnmanam iXaturain Assumpsit (Frankf. 1614). His view was taken up and presented with approbation to the literary world by a learned prelate of the Lutheran Church, bishop ISIiinter (/-'cr Stern der Weisen [Copenh. 1827]). It also gained approval from the celebrated as- tronomer Schubert, of Petersburg {Vennischte Scfirif- ten [Stuttg. 1823]). The learned and accurate Ideler
STAR
993
STARK
(Ffandb. der Chronolofjie, ii, 399 sq.) reviewed the en- tire subject and sii;nitied his af^reeinent. Hase and De Wette, however, have stated objections. A recent writ- er of considerable merit, Wieseler {Vhronolog. Synop. der 4 Erdiif/elien [Hamb. 1H13]), has applied this theory of Kepler's in conjiiuclion with a discovery that he has made from some Chinese astronomical tables, which show that in the year of Home 750 a comet appeared in the heavens and was visible for seventy days. Wiese- ler's opinion is that the conjunction of the planets ex- cited and fixed the attention of the magi, but that their guiding-star was the comet. A modern writer of great ability (Dr. Wordsworth) has suggested the antithesis to Kepler's speculation regarding the star of the magi, viz. that the star was visible to the magi alone. It is difficult to see what is gained or explained by the hy- pothesis. The song of the multitude of the heavenly host was published abroad in IJethleliem, the journey of the magi thither was no secret whispered in a corner. Why, then, should the heaveidy light, standing as a beacon of glory over the place where tiie young child was, be concealed from all eyes but theirs, and form no part in that series of wonders which the Virgin IMother kept and pondered in her heart? A writer in the Journ. of Sac. Lit. April, 1857, argues that the magi fctund the infant Christ at Nazareth, not at IJethlehem; but this is opposed to the indications of the narrative. See Bethlehem.
The works which have been written on the suhject are referred to by Walch, Bihlioth. Theol. ii, 42"2 sq. ; Thiess, Krit. Comment, ii, 350 so. ; Volbeding, Index Programmatum, p. 14; Eisner, in the Symh. Liter. Brem. I, ii, 42 sq. Additional monographs to those there or above cited are the following: Reccard, De Stella qiue Mtiffis Apparuit (Regiom. 1766); Kepler, Die Wel.ieti auf! d. Orient, in the Rintelsch. A nzeig. 1770, p. 4; Soramel, De Stella Nati Regis Jadcenr. (Loud. 1771) ; Velthusen, Der Stern d. Weisen (Hamb. 1783); Thiess, Die Magier und ihr Stern (ibid. 1790) ; Anger, Der Stern d. Weisen (Leips. 1847) ; Trench, Star of the Wise Men (Lond. 1850). See Magi.