026
The two variant genealogies of Jesus in Matthew 1:1–16 and Luke 3:23–38 agree on the essential point that he was descended from King David through Joseph, the husband of Mary. To be the legitimate King of the Jews, Jesus had to stem from David through his human, patriarchal family tree. The question that puzzles the modern reader is: If Mary conceived Jesus of the Holy Spirit, without having had any carnal union with Joseph or any other man, how can Jesus the Son of God be descended from David or anyone else through Joseph?
Matthew and Luke assume that their narrative makes sense to their readers; the Evangelists were not trying to mystify or pose a paradox. Actually, the Davidic descent of God’s Son Jesus through Joseph, Mary’s husband, reflects a concept widely known and accepted by East Mediterranean people from at least the Bronze Age to Roman times.
Dual fatherhood, human and divine, is often attributed in variant forms by Homer to members of the noble warrior class. One example is particularly instructive for understanding the Davidic extraction of Jesus. Odysseus is called “the Zeus-sired son of Laërtes” (Iliad 10:144), attributing to Odysseus superiority as the son of the chief deity but also, at the same time, legitimacy as the King of Ithaca through his human father King Laërtes of Ithaca. There are many differences between the traditions concerning Jesus and Laërtes; for example, one involves a virgin birth while the other does not. But by focusing on what they have in common we can solve the problem we have set out to answer. While Jesus and Odysseus have each two fathers, one divine and the other human, their claim to kingship is based on the ancestry of their mother’s human husband. Ancient kings might claim divine paternity, but their right to the throne was regularly founded on the genealogy of the man married to their mother.
For much of Egyptian history, each Pharaoh was hailed as “the son of (the solar deity) Re” but sat on the throne solely because he was the heir of his mother’s husband, the late Pharaoh. An interesting variation of this theme is the case of the amazing Queen Hatshepsut, who eventually got to rule Egypt not as the wife of a king, but as the Pharaoh “himself” without any male authority over her. Ancient Egypt was not like modern Britain where a Victoria or Elizabeth can, in the normal course of events, be the actual reigning Queen. Unlike Elizabeth, Hatshepsut sometimes assumed masculine attributes and on occasion posed and dressed as a man (complete with beard).1 Hatshepsut was proud of her divine paternity and boasted of the fact that the great god Amon was her father. Indeed a relief at her Deir el-Bahri temple includes a sort of “wedding picture” of the divine Amon with her human mother Ahmose. Yet at the same time Hatshepsut insists that her human father was the Pharaoh Thutmosis I, for this was her only claim to the throne. Sir Alan Gardiner attributes this paradox of dual paternity to “the tortuous workings of the Egyptian mind.” So it might appear to the English ladies and gentlemen among whom Sir Alan grew up, but from the standpoint of the ancient Egyptians, the dual paternity of Queen Hatshepsut was necessary, intelligible and accepted.2
In retrospect it is strange that Sir Alan and other Egyptologists have not compared the dual paternity of Jesus and the Pharaohs. It is equally strange that the modern commentaries of the New Testament have failed to compare Egyptian dual paternity with the Gospels. Egyptian, Mycenaean and New 027Testament dual paternity confront us with reflexes of the same principle: great personages in various segments of the Bible World could have two fathers, one human and one divine. However, one’s position in society, notably kingship, was transmitted not through one’s Father in Heaven but through the human husband of one’s mother.
027
Near-Eastern Archaeology Master’s Degree at Drew University
A new Master’s degree program in Near-Eastern archaeology has been launched by Drew University in Madison, New Jersey.
Professor Robert Bull, archaeological director of the excavations at the Israeli coastal site of Caesarea Maritima, the Roman and Byzantine capital of ancient Palestine, will also be supervisor of the new interdisciplinary offering. Dr. Bull says that “Few other programs combine an interdisciplinary approach (art, anthropology, religious history and linguistics) with an emphasis on research both in the field and in the laboratory.”
Field work will be the keystone of Drew’s requirements. Students will be expected to participate in a full session of excavation, and to successfully complete an original field research project associated with the excavation.
Drew’s special resources for the study of archaeology include:
• Participation in ongoing excavations at Caesarea Maritima.
• Archaeological field schools at Caesarea.
Inquiries about this program should be addressed to Graduate Dean, Bard Thompson; Drew University; Madison, N.J. 07940.
The two variant genealogies of Jesus in Matthew 1:1–16 and Luke 3:23–38 agree on the essential point that he was descended from King David through Joseph, the husband of Mary. To be the legitimate King of the Jews, Jesus had to stem from David through his human, patriarchal family tree. The question that puzzles the modern reader is: If Mary conceived Jesus of the Holy Spirit, without having had any carnal union with Joseph or any other man, how can Jesus the Son of God be descended from David or anyone else through Joseph? Matthew and Luke assume that […]
