| > >
Copyright © Interdisciplinary Encyclopedia of Religion and Science ISSN: 2037-2329 and Michele Crudele
No part of this article may be reproduced, stored in a retrievial system or transmitted without the prior permission of the Editors.
To refer to the content of this article, quote: INTERS – Interdisciplinary Encyclopedia of Religion and Science, edited by G. Tanzella-Nitti, P. Larrey and A. Strumia, http://www.inters.org
 Bethlehem,
Star of
Michele Crudele
I.
The Star of Bethlehem and the Magi in the Holy Scriptures - II.
Representations and interpretations of the star in the Tradition
- III. Some associations with astronomical events. 1. Probable association
with a nova or supernova. 2. A comet?. 3. Meteorites and globular
lightning. 4. A variable star? - IV. The "Star" of Bethlehem as
a planetary conjunction - V. The birth date of Jesus of Nazareth
- VI. The Star of Bethlehem and the work of a scholar on the relationship
between science and faith.
In the traditional
artistic representations of the Nativity of Jesus of Nazareth, there
is a reference to an astronomical event, commonly known as "the
Star of Bethlehem". The background is the Biblical text of the Gospel
according to Matthew (Matthew 2:1-11).
The most common way of describing this "star" is to say that it
was a "comet". Actually it appears on the most famous artistic works,
and it is shown thus in most of the artistic, or familiar, Cribs
in the Christian tradition.
Besides spiritual and theological commentaries, in which
sometimes the star was catalogued as a "miraculous event", over
the centuries there have been questions about the physical reality
and the nature of such a celestial phenomenon as is described in
the Gospel. This last question has, in a general view, some interdisciplinary
aspects, because a study on what originated the phenomenon seen
by the Magi is also a study about the relations between the Biblical
Revelation and the natural world. From a theological perspective,
such a study would deal with those meanings, allegorical or symbolical,
connected with the star: the Biblical hermeneutic can discover and
evaluate these meanings in the light of theological and ecclesiastical
tradition. From an interdisciplinary scientific point of view, we
try to determine whether and how the Star of Bethlehem can be associated
with a real natural astronomical event. Among the positive effects
of this association, there are also decisive elements for a definitive
historical dating of Christ's birth (see Firpo, 1983). There is
a fairly wide recent bibliography (many articles and some books)
on the matter, which means that interest is still high (see Hughes,
1979; Martin, 1996; Teres, 2000). Minor, but valuable, attention
has been dedicated by theologians and exegetes (see Holzmeister,
1942; Rosenberg, 1972; Quéré e Léna, 1996).
I. The Star of Bethlehem and the Magi in the Holy Scriptures
The
Gospel of Matthew is the only source in the New Testament that talks
about this topic, calling it a "star" (Greek: astér). The full
text says: « When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days
of King Herod, behold, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem,
saying, "Where is the newborn king of the Jews? We saw his star at
its rising (tòn astéra en têi anatolêi) and have come to
do him homage." When King Herod heard this, he was greatly
troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. Assembling all the chief
priests and the scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the
Messiah was to be born. They said to him, "In Bethlehem of Judea,
for thus it has been written through the prophet: 'And you,
Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of
Judah; since from you shall come a ruler, who is to shepherd my
people Israel.'" Then Herod called the magi secretly and
ascertained from them the time of the star's appearance. He sent
them to Bethlehem and said, "Go and search diligently for the
child. When you have found him, bring me word, that I too may go and
do him homage." After their audience with the king they set out.
And behold, the star that they had seen at its rising (en têi
anatolêi) preceded them
(proêghen autoús), until it came and stopped over (estáthe
epáno) the place where the child was. They were overjoyed at
seeing the star, and on entering the house they saw the child with
Mary his mother. They prostrated themselves and did him homage. Then
they opened their treasures and offered him gifts of gold,
frankincense, and myrrh. And having been warned in a dream not to
return to Herod, they departed for their country by another way.
[.] When Herod realized that he had been deceived by the magi, he
became furious. He ordered the massacre of all the boys in Bethlehem
and its vicinity two years old and under, in accordance with the
time he had ascertained from the magi. » (Matthew 2:1-12.16)
The
text we have of Matthew's Gospel is the Greek one. Although there
are hypotheses on the existence of an original Aramaic text. The
interpretation of the text must, therefore, start from the Greek
version. The words en têi anatolêi in verses 2 and 9 have
often been translated in the past with the words "in the East",
as if they referred to the "place" where the Magi were when they
saw the star. The official current Italian translation (and the New
American Bible we are using) reads better: "at its rising". The
words are used to refer to a stellar object which, following the rotation of the sky caused by
the earth's rotation, "rises". According to some authors it
refers precisely to the acronychal rising: while the sun sets, the
object rises. It is worth noting that this simple interpretation
leads to a symbolic reference of the star and not a system for
pointing a direction: if the Magi came "from the East", as it is
written in verse 1, they could not use as a guide to the West (Jerusalem)
something that, in that period, could be seen in the East. We do not
know which was the source of information of Matthew about the Magi.
If the Mother of Jesus was the referrer, we suggest that she was
unlikely to have recorded such a technical meaning.
In
the Old Testament, the Book of the Numbers writes: « A star shall
advance from Jacob, and a staff shall rise from Israel. » (Numbers,
24:17) These are words by Balaam, sorcerer or magician, who was
called by the Moabite king Balac in order to blame Israel and came,
on the contrary, to bless it and
prophesized
a splendid future because he had a divine revelation. The
interpretations of this text spring from the identification of the
star with King David (this is the origin of the Israeli symbol known
as "David's star") to the anticipation of the Star of
Bethlehem. The star that comes out of Jacob could be the Messiah
himself: this is what some commentaries in the first centuries wrote.
The prophecy
written in Matthew 2:6, and referred to by the priests who
were called by Herod, is from the Book of Micah: « But you, Bethlehem-Ephrathah
too small to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth
for me one who is to be ruler in Israel. » (Micah 5:1) One
can see the difference between this text and Matthew's, which replaces
the words "too small" with "by no means least": this does not change
the meaning but it reinforces it. It is one of the many demonstrations
of the use of citations from the Old Testament, so frequent in Matthew,
seen in the light of the New Testament's events. The sacred author
was not as keen as we are nowadays on finding a perfect textual
match, but he looked for the sense and the symbolism of the prophecies.
The other evangelists (
GOSPELS) do not talk about the Magi or the star. For Mark and John,
this is not so surprising because their narration starts with the
public activity of Jesus, but Luke, who deals with so many details
of the birth and infancy, surprisingly does not talk about this
episode, either. Perhaps Luke knew Matthew's Gospel and did not
want to repeat what he had read. Some authors say that Luke was
quite prudent and avoided talking positively about Persians, to
whom the Magi belonged, because they were enemies of the Romans.
According
to Herodotus (5th century B.C.), the Magi (Greek: mágoi)
were a caste of the Medeans, belonging to the erudite priests, who
studied the sacred books and watched the sky (see Histories, book I,
101), but the most recent investigations place their origin in
Babylonia and Persia, more than in Medea. The Old and New Testament
refer with that name to people who were magicians, in the widest
sense. Matthew does not speak about "kings", and none of the
most ancient Fathers does either; but Tertulian, at the beginning of
year 200, writes that the Magi in the East were known as kings. A
possible explanation of the title "kings" is the desire to apply
prophecies such as that of Isaiah: « Nations shall walk by your
light, and kings by your shining radiance. » (Isaiah 60:3)
or Psalm 68: « Show it from your temple on behalf of Jerusalem,
that kings may bring you tribute. » (Psalms 68:30) The fact
that the evangelist Matthew does not cite this and other prophecies,
so opportune and applicable to these events, can be a hint on the
historical background of the narration of the Magi: knowing that
they are not kings, he does not think that these ancient texts are
pertinent to their adoration of the Child. If he had only the
purpose of making prophecies come true, he would have surely used
these. From the first centuries, Christianity started talking about
the Three Kings (or Wise Men), also to indicate their importance,
and with their adoration, the submission of the powerful men of the
world to God made Child.
The
Magi could have been Zoroastrians and careful watchers of the sky,
certainly astrologers, in the ancient Babylonian and Assyrian sense,
and not in the Hellenic sense. We note that in the original
tradition of Mesopotamia the sky's appearance was seen as a
"reflex" and sometimes an "anticipation" of what happened on
Earth, but without any implication of causality and astrolatry (
SKY, II.1). We do not know the number of the Magi: Christian
tradition shows two of them in a fresco of the 4th
century in the catacombs of Saints Marceline and Peter in Rome,
three or four are present in other famous catacomb representations,
but also up to fourteen. About their names; starting from the 7th
century, we find sources talking about Gasper, Melchior, and
Balthazar, as the Venerable Bede (673-735) states, specifying that
the third one was a Black. Remains which are thought to be theirs
were found in Persia and were taken to Constantinople by St. Helen
or by Zenon the Emperor, and later moved to Milan in the 5th
century. Finally, they were taken to Cologne in the 12th
century, where they are now greatly venerated in the Cathedral. At
the end of his speech in 1980 to scientists and university personnel
gathered in that Cathedral in Cologne, Pope John Paul II mentioned
the Magi (see Insegnamenti, III, 2(1980), p. 1211).
In
order to guess from where they came, we can estimate the time taken
from their land to Jerusalem. According to where you place their
home in Mesopotamia, distances may vary between 800 and 2000 km;
keeping an average of 50 km per day (a normal pace for the camels of
caravans crossing the desert), the net duration of the trip could
have been around 15-40 days. But we cannot exclude that a similar
journey could take longer. About their origin, Tertulian says that
they came from Arabia, literally applying the messianic Psalm 72: «
May the kings of Tarshish and the islands bring tribute, the kings
of Arabia and Seba offer gifts. » (Psalms
72:10)
It
seems that, according to the data we have from the Gospel, the visit
of the Magi did not happen in the same, provisional, birthplace of
Jesus. In 2:11 of Matthew's Gospel, there is an explicit mention
of "house" (Greek: oikía); the chronology of the events
leads to a visit after the circumcision, eight days after the birth
(see Luke 2:21), and before the presentation of Jesus to the
Temple with his Mother's purification at the fortieth day (see Luke
2:22). There is, finally, a reference to the Star of Bethlehem in
the Protoevangelium of James, an apocryphal text of the 2nd
century ( GOSPELS, III). As usual in this kind of source, the
descriptions are often exaggerated and emphasized, therefore the
reference to a star "so bright to make all the other stars
disappear" cannot be considered valid in order to understand the
physical nature and the appearance of the celestial body.
From
a summary of what we have seen in the analysis of the text of the
Gospel and what we can deduce from it, we can extract some minimal
requirements that a natural explanation of the Star of Bethlehem (that
is, a real natural object or phenomenon) should have. The star must
have been seen from a Country to the East of Palestine, while rising.
It would not have been such a clearly visible object in Jerusalem,
otherwise we cannot understand why Herod - and with him the whole
town - were surprised when the Magi told him about the star
appearing. It is also possible that, in Jerusalem, they saw the star
but did not associate it with the birth of the Messiah, otherwise
Herod would not have asked the Magi to tell him "the exact time
the star had appeared". We are dealing with a phenomenon clear
enough to justify a journey to Jerusalem, but at the same time
evident only to "professional" watchers of the sky. The Gospel
does not say anything about a star that "shows the path" to
Jerusalem from the Magi's country; only for the final part, from
Jerusalem to Bethlehem, Matthew 2:9
says: « the star . preceded them . » Generally speaking, we should say
that, according to the text, the Magi were forced to go to Palestine,
not because they had a "pointing sign", but for some other
reason.
In
the text, we notice with surprise that Herod did not follow the
Magi, or order them to be followed to Bethlehem, bearing in mind
that it is only 10 Km from Jerusalem. Even though the Gospels
describe Herod as very suspicious, perhaps he trusted them, or did
not want to be impolite to such important guests. On the other hand,
it is not strange that he called them secretly: this is in harmony
with what we know about the Jewish king, and we can imagine that he
did not want to produce any gossip about his interest in the future
Messiah, who would take over his reign. In the Judaic vision of that
time, the Messiah was expected to be a king, and liberating, who
would redeem his people from foreign domination.
Going
to Bethlehem, the Magi saw again the star that "preceded
them" (Matthew 2:9). If we read literally this
description, we find it very hard to associate it with a natural
phenomenon. The first point is that the star can be seen from
Jerusalem in the Southern sky (that is pointing to Bethlehem), while
the meaning of "stopped over" is not very clear. It may mean a
vertical high position, or a low one, indicating the house from a
far location. The Greek verb, in its passive form, suggests simply
"staying still" while the adverb "over" indicates the
position. The text finally says that the Magi were overjoyed when
they saw the star again, because its reappearance was a confirmation
that Bethlehem was the correct destination. This emotion is similar
to the one that a scholar feels when he or she achieves an
experimental confirmation of a scientific deduction or a theoretical
prediction.
II. Representations and interpretations of the star in the Tradition
In
almost all artistic representations of the Nativity that show the
Magi adoration, there is also a "star", often represented as the
typical sign of the place where Jesus was born. The most famous
picture is probably the fresco of the rich biblical cycle in the
Scrovegni chapel in Padua, by Giotto at the beginning of the 14th
century. In this fresco, the star has a tail, to show that it was
like a comet, a celestial object, not very frequent, but well known
in ancient times. It seems that Giotto, while painting a realistic
comet, was thinking of Halley's comet, which has a period of about
76 years around the sun. This was visible in 1301, when passing near
the Earth. The oldest pictures, on the contrary, depict a star with
no tail. There are eight spikes in the mosaic, from 433, of St. Mary
the Major in Rome and, in Ravenna, and in the one of St. Apollinaire
The New, from the 6th century, in which there is a
peculiar pair of stars, one inside the other. On the 4th
century's marble sarcophagus of Adelfia, found in St. John's
catacombs in Syracuse (Sicily), one of the Magi points to a
seven-ray star. From around the year 330 is the sarcophagus front
found in the Vatican in which one of the three adoring Magi, near
two camels, points to a wheel-shaped six-ray star. In the most
ancient representation of the Magi - in the fresco of the
catacombs of Priscilla in Rome, dated 2nd century -
there are three of them, but the star does not appear, maybe because
the highest part of the painting is completely ruined. The star
appears, however, in a fresco depicting the Virgin Mary and Balaam
who points at it. Among the common elements of most of these
representations, we have to mention the somatic differences of the
Magi. Changes took place through the centuries as new populations
were discovered, indicating the universality of Christian Redemption
and the call to salvation for all people.
Among
the most ancient authors who tried to find a natural event for the
Star of Bethlehem, we find Origen (about 185-253), who writes a
couple of centuries after the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. He favours
a physical interpretation and, in order to differentiate the
Magi's behaviour from the astrological practice of the Chaldeans,
he describes it as a "new" star, different from known ones (and
therefore not forecast or linked to horoscopes), similar to
celestial phenomena such as comets (cf. Contra Celsum, I,
58-59). He cites a book by the stoic Chaeremon, Nero's preceptor,
called On the comets, noting that it was common habit to
understand that a comet or a new star was associated with the birth
of important persons. He reminds his adversary, Celsus, about the
prophecy of Numbers 24:17 (see above I) and, with it, he
justifies the Magi's travel. Ireneo from Lion (2nd
century) writes about the star referring to the fulfilment of
Balaam's prophecy, but he does not draw a conclusion about its
natural origin (see Adversus haereses, III, 9:2). Differently,
St. John Chrysostom (about 350-407) thinks that the star was a real
miracle, because he cannot reconcile what the evangelical narration
says of the star with the normal characteristics of celestial
objects.
The
Chrysostom dedicates to the Star of Bethlehem, and to its symbolism,
the whole sixth homily in his Comment to the Gospel of Matthew
(see PG 57:61-72). He writes in a Hellenic environment, and thus
clearly states that the star in the Holy Scripture does not have any
astrological meaning, like horoscopes and vaticinations (see V,1).
The travel of the Magi to Judea is somehow a paradox, because it
means humility from their side: they are going to accept a recently
born king, where nobody would have gone to find him... The author
seems to conclude that "the star of the Magi was not an ordinary
star, moreover it was not a real star, but an invisible force that
took the appearance of a star [...] Think, therefore, from where the
Magi had the idea of travelling and what made them start it. I think
that it was not only the work of the star, but also the work of God
who moved their souls" (VI, 2.4). He wants, at the end, to
emphasize the spiritual dimension of the journey and of the
understanding of the star, but he does not exclude the existence of
a sensible sign that is miraculous because it was not linked to any
natural ordinary or extraordinary phenomenon of the sky.
Special
attention is given to the comment on the Magi episode by Pope Leo
the Great (440-461) in his eight Sermons about the Epiphany
(PL 54:234-263). In the third of these, we read: « A star more
brilliant than the other stars arouses wise men that dwell in the
far East, and from the brightness of the wondrous light these men,
not unskilled in observing such things, appreciate the importance of
the sign: this doubtless being brought about in their hearts by
Divine inspiration, in order that the mystery of so great a sight
might not be hid from them, and, what was an unusual appearance to
their eyes, might not be obscure to their minds. » (Sermones
XXXIII:2) The author, even developing in this, and in other sermons,
the allegoric and spiritual meaning of the narration, is keener to
present a natural event as the start of the Magi to understand the
highest meaning of it. The logic is more explicit in the first
sermon: « To three wise men, therefore, appeared a star of new
splendour in the region of the East, which, being brighter and
fairer than the other stars, might easily attract the eyes and minds
of those that looked on it, so that at once that might be observed
not to be meaningless, which had so unusual an appearance. He
therefore who gave the sign, gave to the beholders understanding of
it (dedit ergo aspicientibus intellectum, qui praestitit signum),
and caused inquiry to be made about that, of which He had thus
caused understanding, and after inquiry made, offered Himself to be
found. » (Sermones XXXI:1) An
interesting relation to the universality of the cosmic language -
an object of science - can be found in the link, proposed by St.
Leo, between the celestial and somehow public dimension of the sign
and the universal vocation of all people to know the event and the
grace of Jesus Christ. He notes that, while the recognition of the
Messiah by the Baptist at the beginning of his public life, and
previously the annunciation to Mary, and the news of his birth given
to the shepherds, were a matter for a few people, « this sign that efficaciously moves the Magi from far
countries and attracts them with a irresistible force to Jesus,
Lord, with no doubt is the sacred sign of that grace and the start
of that vocation for which not only in Judea, but all over the world
the Gospel would have been preached. [...] The meaning of these
mystical facts is still present: what started in the image is now
reality. The star irradiates from the sky, as a grace, and the three
Magi, called by the brightness of the evangelical light, every day
in all countries come to adore the power of the highest King. » (Sermones,
XXXV:1-2)
As
far as the biblical exegesis is concerned, we have to notice that,
quite often, it has read the evangelical text in the framework of
the Midrash, a way of interpreting the Scripture typical of
Judaism. The author of the Gospel According to Matthew writes
in a Hebraic environment mainly for Jews and, therefore, may have
been using the Midrash that is reviewing the events in the light of
the previous biblical tradition, associating what happened in those
years to episodes and images already written in the Old Testament.
The whole Magi's story, or perhaps only the appearance of the
star, may be an example of haggadic midrash (which refers to
moral, philosophical and theological matters and is different from halakhic,
which refers to legislation), built by the evangelist to demonstrate
the fulfilment of the prophecies of Balaam or Micah or Isaiah
41:2-3. The latter talks about the Persian king Cyrus (of whom, the
star in the East or the Magi coming from his country, could be an
image) who frees the people of Israel from Babylonian slavery. It
could be, talking in modern TV language, a fiction, a likely
representation, based on real events. This would not exclude the
historical background but would influence the elements of the
narration. In line with the midrashic reading, the star and its
brightness could also be a way of representing the glory of God (Hebraic:
kabod Yahweh), which was visible as a cloud, a light or a
flare, covering the place where Yahweh was present, the Tabernacle (Hebraic
'ohel) of the Exodus and, later, the temple of Jerusalem (see
Exodus 40:30-34; 1 Kings 8:10). The birthplace of
Jesus Christ, visible in the humble and insecure tent, but a figure
of the real and invisible temple, would be covered by the brightness
of the star, as bright was the cloud of the divine glory in the Old
Testament. The exegetes have not dealt with astrological and
divinatory explanations, because it was a condemned practice in the
Old Testament (see Isaiah 47:13-15; Jeremiah 10:1-2;
see SKY, II.2) and it was rejected by Christianity ( CHURCH FATHERS,
IV).
III. Some associations with astronomical events
Astronomers
and scientists are not unanimous on interpretations of the Star of
Bethlehem, and their attitudes range from avoiding any association
with natural events to trying to find a perfect match with some of
them. The first thesis, logically, is not linked to a religious
option, because those who take the Gospel as a historical document,
may correctly follow a spiritual interpretation and interpret the
star event with a "typical or figurate meaning" ( SACRED
SCRIPTURE, III). The astronomers' thesis may be summarized in the
two major examples: Tyco Brahe (1546-1601), who said that the star
was not a natural phenomenon at all (see Opera Omnia,
Frankfurt 1648, vol. I, pp. 239, 420-423) and Johannes Kepler
(1571-1630), who first tried to associate it with a nova and
later with a planetary conjunction (see Opera Omnia,
Frankfurt 1863, vol. IV, pp. 3 and 46). We shall now examine briefly
the main astronomical interpretations for the Star of Bethlehem.
1.
Probable association with a nova or supernova.
Some stars, in particular moments of their thermodynamic evolution,
may rapidly increase their brightness. This is essentially due to
two causes. In the first case, which is typical of the novae,
as soon as the thermonuclear energy source of a star belonging to a
binary system is exhausted, it can collapse into the form of a white
dwarf, or even denser object, such as a neutron star, attracting all
the superficial gaseous layers of the companion star which, falling
at high speed towards the collapsed star, gets hotter and emits
sudden and intense thermal rays. The total brightness of the
original stellar system grows by some magnitudes, though for only a
few weeks. In the second case, a single, but larger, star can
explode like a supernova at the end of its evolution because
of the irreversible instability between the force produced by its
radiation and the gravitational force of its mass. Depending upon
the value of the stellar mass, the phenomenon may vary, but we
always notice the sudden emission of a great quantity of energy, of
both visible light and other frequencies which later decrease slowly.
In both cases, we see in the sky the sudden appearance of a star,
which before the event was fainter or invisible to the naked eye.
Obviously, this does not mean that it is brighter than the brightest
stars in the sky: this can happen statistically in only a limited
number of cases.
Many old, and more recent, stories record a multitude of novae
and supernovae visible to the naked eye (the number visible
through a telescope noticeably increases with the improvement of
technology). From Chinese annals, we have highly detailed recordings
of novae visible to the naked eye. Between 100 B.C. and 1690
A.D. there was an average of one every 20 years, which means they
were not very rare events for the astronomers. Good candidates, from
their dates of appearance, are those of 5 B.C. and 4 B.C. (see
Hughes, 1979, chap. 7). These
were "new" stars, to be added to those already known, that is,
the fixed stars in the scenario of the existing constellations. For
our purposes, it is important to note that we are dealing with stars
whose brightness in the visible part of the spectrum rises to a peak
that lasts for only a short period, just a few days, and later
slowly decreases until it stabilizes (with differences among the
types of novae
and supernovae) at a much lower level. We also have to note, for a good historical
interpretation, that novae did not have a good reputation
among the astrologers of the period: as it was not possible to
forecast them, they thought that novae would portend negative
events.
2.
A comet?
Comets are solid bodies orbiting the sun, though much smaller than
planets and their satellites. Their orbits are highly elliptical,
that is, very stretched; in a limited number of cases, they can be
objects, external to the solar system, that the gravity field of the
sun has captured forcing them on parabolic or hyperbolic orbits that
are not recurring. As the comet approaches the sun, a large part of
the material on its surface evaporates, forming a tail of gas. This
is pushed by the swarms of particles coming from the sun - the
so-called solar wind - and becomes bright, producing the tail of
dust and ionised particles, the direction of which varies along the
orbit, being always directed away from the sun. The brightness of a
comet seen from the earth depends upon its size and distance from
the sun, growing as the distance decreases, even though this
proximity makes the comet more difficult to see, being visible only
near sunrise and sunset. The phenomenon is spectacular, and the tail
points to a direction; with its slow movement with reference to the
fixed stars, the Star of Bethlehem has been classically associated
with a comet.
Chinese
and Babylonian astronomical almanacs provide a list of all the
comets that were seen in the first ten years before Christ. The
well-known Halley's comet, named from Edmond Halley (1656-1742)
who was the first to identify it, has an orbit with a period of 76.3
years and passed near the earth in 12 B.C. It may be the comet
mentioned by Dio Cassius and the Chinese astronomers. This date is
too early if we relate it to other specific sources for the birth
date of Jesus Christ (see infra, V).
We
have to note that, in the astronomical registers of the past, it has
not always been easy to distinguish comets from novae. Even
though the terms used are normally different, there are some
ambiguities which lead to an interchange of names, notwithstanding
the easy way of distinguishing them, because the position of the
comets varies day by day with reference to the fixed stars. The
movement of novae, on the contrary, is not recorded by the
naked eye, as they are proper stars. In Chinese annals, the tail
normally indicates a comet: they write about hui hsing (or sui
hsing), that is, a star that "swipes the sky". The nova
of March 5 B.C., clearly visible for more than 70 days, is also
called hui hsing (and therefore could have been a comet), but
no movement with respect to fixed stars is recorded. There are
doubts if an object without tail, seen in April 4 B.C., was a comet
or a nova, similarly for another in 10 B.C.
The
main objection to the identification of the Star of Bethlehem with a
comet is astrological. Generally speaking, comets foretold disasters
and were not particularly rare or extraordinary, even though they
could be spectacular. Why would the Magi start traveling
just for that event? Anyway, the interpretation of comets as
carriers of misfortune is not universal: there are some cases when
they are associated with good news. A comet follows the criteria of
"appearing" twice: the first when it is approaches the sun, the
second when it recedes (as we have already noted, the tail is
brighter when the comet is nearest to the sun). Between the two
periods there is a time when the body is not visible because it is
in heliacal conjunction (that is too near to the sun to be seen).
When comparing the event with the biblical text, we note that, even
if a comet moves with reference to the stars, this movement is not
so fast as to move clearly in a few hours, that is in a reasonable
time for travelling from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. The evangelical
expression "went ahead of them until it stopped over" cannot be
taken literally in the case of a comet. An interval of two years,
that is the period between the birth of Jesus and the maximum age he
could have been when Herod decided to kill the innocent babies (see Matthew
2:16), would be too long if you take it as the period between the
first and second appearances of the same comet. If the star were a
comet, it would have been visible also in Jerusalem, but it would
not have been understood as a sign and therefore the excitement of
the Jews could only have been due to the "interpretation" of the
Magi.
3.
Meteorites and globular lightning. Small asteroids and wandering stones in the solar system cross the
earth's path and enter the atmosphere at high speed, burning and
emitting a strong light. Sometimes they are not completely destroyed
and fall to our planet's surface. The light lasts for a few
seconds and there may also be some noise (bolides). The frequency of
these phenomena is high: almost every night they are visible, with
particular days on which they are more frequent - when the earth
crosses some of the main swarms of meteorites, like on the 10th
of August for the Perseids and in November for the Leonids. The only
way of making the narration of the Gospel compatible with these
objects would be to have a series of large meteorites, but this
hypothesis would require too many coincidences. We do not understand
why the Magi should have decided to move just when they saw such a
repetitive event; the only reasonable occasion could have be a very
huge meteorite, but we have no trace of it in the astronomical
almanacs of that time. The term "meteor" is used in many senses
to indicate a transient phenomenon in the terrestrial atmosphere.
Therefore we are not surprised when, grossly, in the note to Matthew
2:2 of the official edition of the Bible by the Italian Bishop
Conference, Salvatore Garofalo writes: "the star was a light
phenomenon of the atmosphere". Years before, the Enciclopedia
Cattolica wrote about it as a "miraculous meteor, not so high
in the atmosphere".
Globular
lightning is an electrical phenomenon that occurs in the lowest
parts of the atmosphere: it is not yet completely understood. It
takes different shapes, often spherical. It lasts for a few seconds,
or at most for a couple of minutes, and moves in an unpredictable
manner and at different speeds, running in strange paths and
sometimes becoming stationary. Just for this behaviour, they are the
best candidates for a literal interpretation - thinking of a very
fast event - of the words: "stopped over". But in order to be
compatible with the other parts of the text, we have to suppose the
existence of two such instances at two different moments.
There
is also a problem in the use of the term aster (star) for an
object that is
not at all a celestial body. If the Magi were really professional
astronomers, they would have not talked about a star to Herod. The
problem with the word aster is a general one: if we take the
exact meaning, we have to exclude also the translation "planet"
(Greek: planétes). We have to remember that, in the Greek
version of the Old Testament, the term planes is never used.
4.
A variable star?
Some stars, well known also to amateur astronomers, vary their
brightness in a periodical manner. The variation can be for
different reasons, the main two being the pulsation of the
thermodynamic structure of the star (pulsing variables) or the
periodical eclipses of one or more components of a double or
multiple stellar system.
The
best candidate for the Star of Bethlehem may be Mira, in the
constellation of Cetus. In a cycle of 11 months, Mira can sometimes
reach the same brightness as the polar star (a magnitude 2 in the
visual brightness scale) or more often magnitude 3, only later to
lower its brightness 1000 times, being invisible to the naked eye
for about half of its cycle. The reddish colour of Mira could recall
to the Magi the divine symbolism of fire in the Zoroastrian Persian
culture. The lack of detailed star charts and the limited interest
in the variations of stars (which were considered fixed and
unchangeable) could lead them to take it as a nova (see above,
n.1).
The
region of Cetus in which we find Mira is also very near to the place
where, in 6-7 B.C., there was the triple planetary conjunction
between Jupiter and Saturn (see below, IV), which could have led to
more attention being paid to that part of the sky. As soon as they
noticed the increasing brightness of the star, the Magi started
their journey but, due to the variations of Mira, they lost sight of
it. Once in Jerusalem, they asked Herod for suggestions. The
king's counsellors did not notice the star because it was not very
clear for non-specialist watchers of the sky. The low latitude of
Cetus may suggest that the words "stopped over" mean not the
vertical position but the horizontal one, serving as a pointing
level.
The
problems with this interpretation are mainly with the short time it
allows for the Magi's travel: only one month, that is the period
of the star. Some experts say, though, that it may take only ten
days to go from Babylon to Jerusalem if the camels are pushed. The
short period is not compatible with Herod killing all the babies
younger than two years, according to the information given by the
Magi. Moreover, the astrological symbolism (in a wide sense) of the
star is not completely defined.
IV. The "Star" of Bethlehem as a planetary conjunction
We
will dedicate more space to the hypothesis of a planetary
conjunction because there is more scientific literature about it.
When two or more celestial objects, stars or planets, seem to be
very near to each other, we call it a "conjunction". It is only
an optical effect, because their real distance is generally enormous:
only projected onto the background of the sky they seem to approach
each other. In some cases, they seem to "fuse" in a single
visible object. In this case we say that there is an "occultation",
which shows us only the nearer object: the maximum brightness is
reached when the two bodies are adjacent, before one hides the other.
Before
Christmas 1603, Kepler watched a conjunction between Jupiter and
Saturn. The minimal distance between the two planets was around an
arc degree, that is double the apparent size of the moon. He was
interested by the fact that it happened in the Pisces constellation
and he related it to some Hebraic traditions that underlined the
importance of such an event. He calculated that in the year 7 B.C. a
similar conjunction happened but with a more interesting detail: the
conjunction occurred thrice in the same year. Between May and
December the two planets approached and receded from each other
three times. This is possible because the planetary orbits,
projected on the celestial sphere of the fixed stars, seem to draw
rings, precisely a direct motion and later a retrograde one, caused
by the differences in the relative motions of the earth and the
planet, that have different speeds of revolution around the sun. The
event of a conjunction occurring three times in a few months is
quite rare. In the following year, Kepler noticed an even rarer
event, that is, the clustering of three planets: Jupiter, Saturn and
Mars. It was not a conjunction, strictly speaking, because the
distances were of some degrees, but the phenomenon was interesting
for those who are used to watch the sky: three very bright objects
in the same sky area are a good sight. He calculated that this
triple gathering could happen every 805 years. It therefore happened
in 799 A.D. (Charles the Great period), in 7 B.C. (the probable
birth date of Christ), in 812 B.C. (Isaiah's time), in 1617 B.C. (period
of Moses). Going backwards, he reached 4032 B.C. where he assumed
the creation of Adam. In October 1604, he saw a supernova,
which was visible for a full year. Kepler did not think that these
conjunctions could be the actual Star of Bethlehem, but he
considered them as spectacular events, which would have attracted
the Persian astronomers. It was presumably a "preparation" for
the Magi to the great event, which was, according to Kepler, a nova
which followed.
The
hypothesis of the conjunction has stimulated the interest of many
contemporary scholars, because they think that it is the phenomenon
that has the greatest chance of being the Star of Bethlehem. The
measurements of the positions of Jupiter and Saturn for the year 7
B.C., besides being calculated now, have been found also on
astronomical calendars in tablets from Babylon. A tentative
reconstruction of the chronology of the events may be the following.
In May 7 B.C., the Magi watched the first of the three conjunctions
of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation of Pisces and gave it a
symbolic value related to the birth of the Hebraic Messiah. They
also calculated the following conjunctions and decided to move to
Jerusalem. Around September, they watched the second conjunction,
while travelling. In December they reached Jerusalem and asked Herod
for information about the prophecies regarding the birth of the
Messiah. Soon after, they observed the third conjunction, in the
constellation of Pisces, which, after sunset, can be seen in the
South, that is, towards Bethlehem. They moved from Jerusalem to
Bethlehem in the afternoon, and when the sky got dark, the two
planets rose in the Southeast, culminating in the South, high enough
to be visible and bright. Certainly, the two bodies never appeared
as a single star, therefore the use of the word aster by the
Gospel should be taken in a generic sense, not as a technical
astronomical term. We can also think that the "star" was only
Jupiter (as a symbol of the Messiah, while Saturn could symbolize
Yahweh). In their apparent angular motion (Jupiter's is faster
than Saturn's), the planets have a "stationary point" at which
they seem to stay still with reference to the fixed stars: in the
case of Jupiter this would have been clearer, which suggests us an
interpretation of the "stopped over" (Matthew 2:9).
Why
would this conjunction and not previous ones, which were even more
impressive, even though not triple, lead the Persian astronomers to
start a long journey? The main reason could be the celestial
symbolism. The Pisces constellation was related by the astronomers
to the Jews (there were other frequent associations of other
constellations to other populations) and Jupiter was considered the
planet of royalty. There was the feeling that the Hebraic Messiah
was coming; the Magi knew the Scriptures and the prophecies on this,
because of the deportation of the Hebrews to Babylonia in the 6th
century B.C. and the possible presence of Jews in Mesopotamia
produced some diffusion of their traditions. In a Hellenic
mythological and astrological framework (that we only suggest here),
Saturn (Kronos) was being replaced by Jupiter (Zeus), his son, as
the head of all gods, which is somehow parallel (with very different
modes) to the awaiting for a Son of God. Finally, it may be
interesting to notice that in the iconography of the former
Christians, fish (Pisces) is a symbol of Jesus Christ, because the
Greek word ichtus (fish) is an acronym of Iesus Christos
Theou Uios Soter - Jesus Christ Son of God the Saviour.
The fact that the two year period calculated by Herod is not
congruent with the timing of the event seen by the Magi can be
simply a mathematical rounding upward, to be sure not to be wrong:
this is something found in biblical language. If we compare the text
of Matthew, in particular, with the other Synoptics we find some "doublings",
(e.g. the two "born blind men": see Matthew 20:29; Mark
10:46).
Following
the thesis of Ferrari d'Occhieppo (1978), David Hughes (1979) adds
other details to the mentioned hypothesis, leading to a probable
date of Jesus' birth: the evening of Tuesday, 15th
September, 7 B.C. when Jupiter and Saturn rose together opposite the
setting sun.
Ernest
Martin (1996) says that the Star of Bethlehem was Jupiter, linking
it to a series of conjunctions different from the triple one with
Saturn. The reconstruction of Martin starts in 3 B.C., when Jupiter
is in conjunction with Regulus (literally "little king"), the
brightest star of the constellation of Leo. The link with the
prophecy of Jacob about Jude, heir of the divine promise, as a
lion's whelp (Genesis 49:9) is immediate. According to
Martin, 11th September, 3 B.C. is the most probable date
of the birth of Jesus. It is the beginning of the Hebraic year (Rosh
ha-Shanah), the sun is in the constellation of Virgo and in the
morning the moon rises just at the feet of this constellation (note
the parallel with Revelation 12:1: « A great sign appeared
in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her
feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. ») which happened
only on that day in the year. A dozen stars are visible in the upper
part of the constellation, in the shape of a circle. The explanation
of "stopped over" is also here the stationary point of Jupiter,
on 25th December, 2 B.C., at the centre ("in the womb")
of the constellation of Virgo. This stationary point lasted one week
and is particularly symbolic of the birth of Jesus, happening just
on the winter solstice (it means "the sun that stays still",
which, according to Martin, recalls once again the "stopped
over"), which was near the Saturnalia feast and now near the
Christian Christmas. The whole thesis of Martin is biased by the
date of Herod's death, which should be moved to the years of
either 1 B.C. or 1 A.D. (see Pratt, 1990), which is different from
the 4 B.C. accepted by almost all scholars.
The
death of Herod the Great has a similar problem of dating if we
accept the hypothesis of the planet Venus as the Star of Bethlehem:
it is the brightest star of the night sky besides the moon. Starting
from an interesting narrow conjunction with Jupiter on 12th
August, 3 B.C., we move to a conjunction on 17th June, 2
B.C., so narrow that the two planets appeared to the naked eye as a
single object in the sky at the sunset. Also Martin (1996) says that
this event is crucial for accepting the Venus hypothesis. The sight
must have been really exceptional and, seen from the Magi's
country, was just in the direction of Palestine (West). The
constellation of Leo, and the visual proximity of the two planets
with Regulus. are more in favour of an association with a King of
the Jews. Moreover Venus is called "the morning star" because it
is clearly visible at dawn, in some periods. The morning star is
Christ in some places in the New Testament (2 Peter 1:19, Revelation
2:28 and 22:16). The Magi probably started their expedition to
Jerusalem after this very narrow conjunction and would have been
there for another, less narrow, on August 21st, 1 B.C. in
Virgo, which somehow recalled the one before. However this
reconstruction does not explain the phrase "We saw his star at its
rising" (Matthew 2:2) as, in June, 2 B.C., the conjunction
between Jupiter and Venus was setting. The phrase could be applied
to the first of the three conjunctions, in August, 3 B.C. because it
occurred in the eastern sky. This forces us to extend the use of the
singular term "star" to all three events, while it should be,
strictly speaking, only referred to the second conjunction. The best
point for this thesis is the two-year period between the first and
the last event, which corresponds to the answer the Magi gave to
Herod.
V. The birth date of Jesus of Nazareth
The
astronomical identification of the Star of Bethlehem and the birth
date of Jesus are strictly correlated. The available information can
be valuable for both events. Moreover, even for choosing some of the
astronomical events mentioned, the dating of the death of Herod is
also important.
Our
calendar starts with the year 1 A.D., following the year 1 B.C. In
astronomical calculations, for the sake of simplicity, the year zero
is added, but the dates are written with + and -, and not B.C. and
A.D.; therefore the year 6 B.C. is the year -5. In the 6th
century, Dionysus the Small thought that it was more convenient to
have a Christian reference for calculating dates, instead of
counting years - as was usual - starting from the coronation of
Diocletian as an emperor; by the way, he had been one of the major
persecutors of the new religion. Before Diocletian, the Roman
calendar started again with the coronation of a new emperor.
Dionysus calculated that Jesus was born in the year 753 ab Urbe
condita, that is, after the foundation of Rome. Almost all
scholars think that he made a mistake of six years. It was not an
easy task for him, also because of the different calculation methods
that were in use in the first centuries before and after Christ,
almost always referred to regal events, but with no fixed rule on
the definition of "start of the first year of kingdom": the day
of the designation, the day of take over, the first day of the
following year, or some other moment. Dionysus stated that Jesus was
born on December 25th in the year 1 B.C. and that the
year 1 A.D. started one week after, on January 1st. Two
centuries passed before they started to use the new system for
calculating years, and now it is almost the only system in use.
A
lower limit for the birth date of Jesus can be taken from Luke
3:23 who writes: « When Jesus began his ministry he was about
thirty years of age. » Moreover, in Luke 3:1-2, introducing
the ministry of the Baptist, we read: « In the fifteenth year of
the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of
Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip
tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was
tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and
Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the
desert. » Knowing that the 15th year of the empire of
Tiberius is the interval 27-29 A.D. (the uncertainty is due to
different ways of calculating years by the Romans), taking out a
maximum of 34 years (the "about" thirty years) we obtain 8-7
B.C. The death of Jesus gives us other data: we know from the Gospel
that it occurred on a Friday, on the 14th or 15th
of the Nisan Hebraic month. This concurrence of the day of the week
and the number of the day occurs in the years 30 and 33, calculated
according to the system of Dionysus, that is the Christian Era.
The
upper limit for a correct estimation of the birth date of Jesus is
given by the death of Herod, because of the events he led after
Jesus was born. We have to remember that, in general, Herod is
called "the Great" to distinguish him from his son Herod Antipas,
who reigned in Judea during the public life of Jesus Christ. The
main source for this dating is Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian
who, after the destruction of Jerusalem, started writing for the
Romans the history of the "chosen people". His works are written
at the end of the first century. According to Flavius Josephus (see
Jewish War, I, 33,1 e 5-6.8; II,1,3; Jewish Antiquities, XVII,
6,1.4-5; XVII, 8-9), Herod, Idumæan, conquered Jerusalem and
ascended the throne in 37 B.C., reigning for 34 years. He died, in
deep pain, just after a lunar eclipse and before that year's
Easter. As we have, from astronomical calculations, the data of a
partial eclipse of moon in the first hours of 13th March,
4 B.C., many have concluded that his death was between 13th
March and 11th April, 4 B.C.
This
date is almost universally accepted, even though some reasonable
objections have been raised. The main one is the difficulty of
having all the events described by Flavius Josephus between the
lunar eclipse of 13th March and Easter, 29 days later
(see Caspari, 1896, pp. 21 and following). The attempts to cure
Herod's illness, by moving him to another town, the killing of his
son Antipater (not to be confused with Antipa), his death five days
after that killing, the solemn funerals and the mourning period of
seven days, besides the mourning period for some patriots who had
been killed the day before the eclipse, are all events which should
have been occurred before Easter, when mourning was prohibited by
the Mishnah. If we exclude the year 4 B.C. and go back one year to
the total eclipse of 23rd March, 5 B.C., we have the same
problem of being too near to Easter (one month), besides having
other incongruities because the eclipse is too anticipated with
respect to other events. The total eclipse of 15th
September, 5 B.C. seems, on the other hand, too far from the
following Easter. It is not logical that Archelaus would have waited
for six months before travelling to Rome to obtain confirmation of
his succession: we know that he moved "soon after the feast". In
the years 3 and 2 B.C., there were no visible eclipses in Palestine,
therefore we have to jump to 10th January, 1 B.C. or to
the partial one of 29th December in the same year. Just
the latter, according to Pratt (1990), seems to be the most
probable, because it is clearly visible soon after sunset, having
started before it. Flavius Josephus recording only this eclipse in
his Annals can be explained by this being an astounding event and
moreover, just after the killing of the patriots. Therefore, Pratt
says that Herod died at the beginning of the year 1 A.D. The
deduction is a possible birth date for Jesus in the year 1 B.C.,
before the 21st August when the Magi saw a Venus-Jupiter
conjunction. Easter day, 1 B.C., is an evocative date and would lead
to considering the year 2001 as the real start of the third
millennium from the birth of Christ. Giulio Firpo (1983) reaffirms
the validity of 4 B.C. for Herod's death, citing some other
events, which have almost certain dates. Other authors (see Filmer
1996) give alternative explanations for these events, leaving a
margin of credibility to Martin's thesis, which is based on the
eclipse of 10th January, 1 B.C., and Pratt's
hypothesis.
One
of the main objections to the new dating of Herod's death from 4
B.C. is based on the reigns of Archelaus and Philip, his heirs,
which are recorded as starting in 4 B.C. Those who say that Herod
died in 1 B.C. or A.D. state that his successors fictitiously moved
back the start of their ruling, and support for this comes from the
fact that we have not found any money minted before the fifth year
of their reign. The year 1 B.C. or A.D. would therefore be the first
year of their reign, but de jure, they had it fixed in 4 B.C.
and so they had it recorded in the annals.
The
census mentioned in Luke 2:1 is another important event to
fix the birth date of Jesus. Most people think of the 8 B.C. census,
but some experts say that this was applied only to Roman citizens.
Orosius, a historian living in 5th century, says that,
for the 25th anniversary of his reign (that is around 2
B.C.) Augustus ordered a census (which started the year before) with
an oath of allegiance to the Roman Empire, and that Jesus was listed
in it as soon as he was born. This thesis is compatible with
Pratt's for the birth of Jesus in 1 B.C. and with Martin's for
11th September, 3 B.C.
There
are still some problems to be solved and historiography has not
finished its task of investigating the chronology of Jesus. The lack
of universal chronological references, some noticeable differences
among the sources, and a clear lack of data for the period 6 B.C. to
4 A.D. make the work quite difficult. We shall probably have to wait
for new sources (such as tablets or inscriptions) to solve the
enigma.
VI. The Star of Bethlehem and the work of a scholar on the relationship
between science and faith
With
the data we have, it is not possible to gain a sure correspondence
between the Star of Bethlehem and a specific astronomical
phenomenon. There are reasons to believe that the narration of
Matthew's Gospel, in telling about the Magi and their finding of
Jesus born in Bethlehem, is within a framework which makes it
possible to refer to a real event in the sky that caused some
sky-watching experts of Mesopotamia to move to Jerusalem. Among the
possible associations with the phenomena we briefly reported, the
one that has gained most assent is the triple conjunction of Jupiter
and Saturn. Its allegoric nature, its uniqueness and its concordance
with the most probable dates of Herod's death, make it the best
candidate, even though the alternative proposed by Martin, with
Jupiter and Venus, is rich with biblical references and is very
evocative. It may seem a useless task to continue to study this
subject. On the contrary, we think that every deepening of the
astronomical knowledge of that time, besides all the topics related
to the chronology of Jesus of Nazareth, can be an important cultural
enrichment and is a relevant example of interdisciplinary research.
But
there is something more. In the horizon of the relation between
science and faith, the believer can find in the Magi's story some
significant hints. Abstracting from the scientific, biblical or
astronomical debate on the meaning and nature of the star, and
placing the personages mentioned in the Gospel within the knowledge
and culture of the period, we can say that the Magi's story
represents a typical paradigm of the relation between scientific
observation and the dynamic of the faith. Together with other well
known biblical texts (see Wisdom 13:1-5; Psalms 19 and
104; Isaiah 40:25-26;
Romans 1:18-20; Acts 14:15-17 and 17:26-27; etc.), it
provides a path which, starting from the observation of the creation
- precisely, of the sky - can lead to God. The peculiarity of
this course is that it is not only aesthetic, but also somehow
"professional", with the application of knowledge, procedures,
and forecasts. The researcher, we could say, is personally involved,
so that he or she must be able to start a course giving him or her
some surpassing perspective over what he or she can know or foretell
by staying in the observatory. The scholar must have responsibility
and courage for a very personal verification, which implies some
detachment and a trial; but the result is the joy of having found
what was sought.
The spiritual
interpretation in the Christian tradition (see above, II) which
associates the Star to the light of the personal vocation can then be read in this light. Everyone
is called by God to go towards Him, by passing through the mystery
of the Incarnated Word, who fulfilled the Revelation. Using the
words of a contemporary saint: « God has called us clearly and unmistakably.
Like the Magi we have discovered a star: a light and a guide in
the sky of our soul. [.] It is a clear desire to attain the fullness
of charity, the conviction that sanctity is not only possible but
necessary in the midst of our social and professional tasks. [.]
Our Christian vocation does not take us away from our place in the
world, but it requires us to cast aside anything that would get
in the way of God's will. » (St. J. Escrivá, Christ is passing
by, n. 32-33). The acknowledgment of vocation, the guide of
a light, which we have seen but which sometimes disappears, the
feelings of astonishment, expectation and joy, are at the end the
metaphor of every Christian life, seeking and meeting God.
And the fact that some scholars were the protagonists, starting
from their very scientific work, is surely encouraging.
Michele Crudele
See: ASTRONOMY;
SKY; SACRED SCRIPTURE; GOSPELS.
Bibliography:
C.E. Caspari, Chronologisch-geographische
Einleitung in das Leben Jesu Christi, Hamburg 1896; U. Holzmeister, La stella dei Magi, "Civiltà Cattolica"
93 (1942), pp. 9-22; J. Keplero,
De anno natali Christi (1614), in "Gesammelte Werke", Münich
1953, vol. V, pp. 5-125; W.E. Filmer,
The Chronology of the Reign of Herod the Great, "Journal
of Theological Studies", n.s., 17 (1966), pp. 283-298; R.W. Sinnott,
Thoughts on the Star of Bethlehem, "Sky & Telescope"
36 (1968), pp. 384-386; R.
Rosenberg, The star of the Messiah reconsidered, "Biblica"
53 (1972), pp. 105-109; D.
Hughes, The Star of Bethlehem, "Nature" 264 (1976),
pp. 513-517; D. Clark, J.
Parkinson, F. Stephenson,
An Astronomomical Re-appraisal of the Star of Bethlehem. A Nova
in 5 B.C., "Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society"
18 (1977), pp. 443-449; D.
Clark, R. Stephenson, The Historical Supernovae, Pergamon
Press, Oxford 1977; K. Ferrari d'Occhieppo, The Star of Bethlehem, "Quarterly
Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society" 19 (1978), pp. 517-520;
C. Cullen, Can we
Find the Star of Bethlehem in Far Eastern records?, "Quarterly
Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society" 20 (1979), pp. 153-159;
D. Hughes, The Star
of Bethlehem. An Astronomer's Confirmation, Walker & Co.,
New York 1979; J. Mosley,
Common errors in "Star of Bethlehem" planetarium shows, "The
Planetarian" 10 (1981), n. 3; G. Firpo,
La data della morte di Erode il Grande. Osservazioni su alcune
recenti ipotesi, "Studi Senesi" 32 (1983), pp. 87-104; G. Firpo, Il problema cronologico della nascita di Gesù,
Paideia, Brescia 1983; J.P. Pratt,
Yet another Eclipse for Herod, "The Planetarian" 19 (1990),
n. 4, pp. 8-14; K. Paffenroth,
The Star of Bethlehem Casts Light on its Modern Interpreters,
"Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society" 34 (1993),
pp. 449-460; F. Quéré, I magi alla luce della stella, "Il mondo della
Bibbia" 7 (1996), n. 35, pp. 12-15; P.
Léna, Un fenomeno celeste?, in ibidem, pp.
16-17; E. Martin, The
Star that Astonished the World, ASK Publications, Portland 19982;
M. Molnar, The Star
of Bethlehem: The Legacy of the Magi, Rutgers Univ. Press, London
1999; G. Teres, The
Bible and Astronomy. The Magi and the Star in the Gospel, Springer,
Budapest 2000.
|
