earlier. This brings us close to the ecclesiastical date, the 25th of December, in

confirmation of which we refer to what has been stated in vol. i. p. 187, see especially

note 3. At any rate, the often repeated, but very superficial objection, as to the

impossibility of shepherds tending flocks in the open at that season, must now be

dismissed as utterly untenable, not only for the reasons stated in vol. i. p. 187, but even

for this, that if the question is to be decided on the ground of rain- fall, the probabilities

are in favour of December as compared with February - later than which it is impossible

to place the birth of Christ.

2. No certain inference can, of course, be drawn from the appearance of 'the star' that

guided the Magi. That, and on what grounds, our investigations have pointed to a

confirmation of the date of the Nativity, as given above, has been fully explained in vol. i.

ch. vi... (see specially p. 213).

3. On the taxing of Quirinius, see vol. i. pp. 181, 182.

4. The next historical datum furnished by the Gospels is that of the beginning of St. John

the Baptist's ministry, which, according to St. Luke, was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius,

and when Jesus was 'about thirty years old' (St. Luke iii. 23). The accord of this with our

reckoning of the date of the Nativity has been shown in vol. i. p. 264.

5. A similar conclusion would be reached by following the somewhat vague and general

indication furnished in St. John ii. 20.

6. Lastly, we reach the same goal if we follow the historically somewhat uncertain

guidance of the date of the Birth of the Baptist, as furnished in this notice (St. Luke i. 5)

of his annunciation to his father, that Zacharias officiated in the Temple as on of 'the

course of Abia' (see here vol. i. p. 135). In Taan. 29 a we have the notice, with which that

of Josephus agrees (War vi. 4. 1. 5), that at the time of the destruction of the Temple 'the

course of Jehoiarib,' which was the first of the priestly courses, was on duty. That was on

the 9-10 Ab of the year 823 A.U.C., or the 5th August of the year 70 of our era. If this

calculation be correct (of which, however, we cannot feel quite sure), then counting 'the

courses' of priests backwards, the course of Abia would, in the year 748 A.U.C. (the year

before the birth of Christ) have been on duty from the 2nd to the 9th of October. This also

would place the birth of Christ in the end of December of the following year (749), taking

the expression 'sixth month' in St. Luke i. 26, 36, in the sense of the running month (from

the 5th to the 6th month, comp. St. Luke i. 24). But we repeat that absolute reliance

cannot be placed on such calculations, at least so far as regards month and day. (Comp.

here generally Wieseler, Synopse, and his Beiträge.)