unfounded. Even Keim points out, that it only marks disbelief that the Messiah would come from such a place.] with all the peculiarities of the impulsive, straight-spoken, hot-blooded, brave, intensely national Galileans; [3 Our description of them is derived from notices by Josephus (such as War iii. 3, 2), and many passages in the Talmud,] with the deeper feelings and almost instinctive habits of thought and life, which were the outcome of long centuries of Old Testament training; but also with the petty interest and jealousies of such places, and with all the ceremonialism and punctilious self-assertion of Orientals. The cast of Judaism prevalent in Nazareth would, of course, be the same as in Galilee generally. We know, that there were marked divergences from the observances in that stronghold of Rabbinism, [4 These differences are marked in Pes. iv. 5; Keth. iv. 12; Ned. ii. 4; Chull. 62 a; Baba K. 80 a; Keth. 12 a.] Judaea, indicating greater simplicity and freedom from the constant intrusion of traditional ordinances. The home-life would be all the purer, that the veil of wedded life was not so coarsely lifted as in Judaea, nor its sacred secrecy interfered with by an Argus-eyed legislation. [5 The reader who wishes to understand what we have only ventured to hint, is referred to the Mishnic tractate Niddah.] The purity of betrothal in Galilee wasless likely to be sullied, [a Keth. 12 a] and weddings were more simple than in Judaea, without the dubious institution of groomsmen, [b Keth. 12 a, and often] [6 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life,' &c, pp. 152 &c] or 'friends of the bridegroom,' [c St. John iii. 29.] whose office must not unfrequently have degenerated into utter coarseness. The bride was chosen, not as in Judaea, where money was too often the motive, but as in Jerusalem, with chief regard to 'a fair degree;' and widows were (as in Jerusalem) more tenderly cared for, as we gather even from the fact, that they had a life-right of residence in their husband's house.
Such a home was that to which Joseph was about to bring the maiden, to whom he had been betrothed. Whatever view may be taken of the genealogies in the Gospels according to St. Matthew and St. Luke, whether they be regarded as those of Joseph and of Mary, [1 The best defence of this view is that by Wieseler, Beitr. zur Wurdig. d. Evang. pp. 133 &c. It is also virtually adopted by Weiss (Leben Jesu, vol. i. 1882).] or, which seems the more likely, [2 This view is adopted almost unanimously by modern writers.] as those of Joseph only, marking his natural and his legal
descent [3 This view is defended with much skill by Mr. McClellan in his New Testament, vol. i. pp. 409-422.] from David, or vice versa [4 So Grotius, Bishop Lord Arthur Hervey, and after him most modern English writers.], there can be no question, that both Joseph and Mary were of the royal lineage of David. [5 The Davidic descent of the Virgin-Mother, which is questioned by some even among orthodox interpreters, seems implied in the Gospel (St. Luke i. 27, 32, 69; ii. 4), and an almost necessary inference from such passages as Rom. i. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 8; Hebr. vii. 14. The Davidic descent of Jesus is not only admitted, but elaborately proved, on purely rationalistic grounds, by Keim (u. s. pp. 327-329).] Most probably the two were nearly related, [6 This is the general view of antiquity.] while Mary could also claim kinship with the Priesthood, being, no doubt on her mother's side, a 'blood-relative' of Elisabeth, the Priest-wife of Zacharias. [a St. Luke i. 36.] [7 Reference to this union of Levi and Judah in the Messiah is made in the Test. xii. Patriarch., Test. Simeonis vii. (apud Fabr. Cod. Pseudepigr. vol. ii. p. 542). Curiously, the great Hillel was also said by some to have descended, through his father and mother, from the tribes of Judah and Levi, all, however, asserting his Davidic origin (comp. Jer. Taan. iv. 2; Ber. R. 98 and 33).] Even this seems to imply, that Mary's family must shortly before have held higher rank, for only with such did custom sanction any alliance on the part of Priests. [8 Comp, Maimonides, Yad haChaz Hil. Sanh. ii. The inference would, of course, be the same, whether we suppose Mary's mother to have been the sister-in-law, or the sister, of Elisabeth's father.] But at the time of their betrothal, alike Joseph and Mary were extremely poor, as appears, not indeed from his being a carpenter, since a trade was regarded as almost a religious duty, but from the offering at the presentation of Jesus in the Temple, [b St. Luke ii. 24.] Accordingly, their betrothal must have been of the simplest, and the dowry settled the smallest possible. [9 Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ,' pp. 143 -149. Also the article on 'Marriage' in Cassell's Bible-Educator, vol. iv. pp. 267-270.] Whichever of the two modes of betrothal [10 There was a third mode, by cohabitation; but this was highly disapproved of even by the Rabbis.] may have been adopted: in the presence of witnesses, either by solemn word of mouth, in due prescribed formality, with the added pledge of a piece of money, however small, or of money's worth for use; or else by writing (the so-called Shitre Erusin), there would be no sumptuous feast to follow; and the ceremony would conclude with some such benediction as that afterwards in use: 'Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the World, Who hath sanctified us by His Commandments, and enjoined us about incest, and forbidden the betrothed, but allowed us those wedded by Chuppah (the marriage-baldachino) and betrothal. Blessed art Thou, Who sanctifiest Israel by Chuppah and betrothal', the whole being perhaps concluded by a benediction over the statutory cup of wine, which was tasted in turn by the betrothed. From that moment Mary was the betrothed wife of Joseph; their relationship as sacred, as if they had already been wedded. Any breach of it would be treated as adultery; nor could the band be dissolved except, as after marriage, by regular divorce. Yet months might intervene between the betrothal and marriage. [1 The assertion of Professor Wunsche (Neue Beitr. zur Erlauter. d. Evang. p. 7) that the practice of betrothal was confined exclusively, or almost so, to Judaea, is quite ungrounded. The passages to which he refers (Kethub. i. 5, not 3, and especially Keth. 12 a) are irrelevant. Keth. 12 a marks the simpler and purer customs of Galilee, but does not refer to betrothals.]
Five months of Elisabeth's sacred retirement had passed, when a strange messenger brought its first tidings to her kinswoman in far-off Galilee. It was not in the solemn grandeur of the Temple, between the golden altar of incense and the seven-branched candlesticks that the Angel Gabriel now appeared, but in the privacy of a humble home at Nazareth. The greatest honor
bestowed on man was to come amidst circumstances of deepest human lowliness, as if the more clearly to mark the exclusively Divine character of what was to happen. And, although the awe of the Supernatural must unconsciously have fallen upon her, it was not so much the sudden appearance of the mysterious stranger in her retirement that startled the maiden, as the words of his greeting, implying unthought blessing. The 'Peace to thee' [2 I have rendered the Greek by the Hebrew and for the correctness of it refer the reader to Grimm's remarks on 1 Mace. x. 18 (Exeget. Handb. zu d. Apokryph. 3(tte) Lief. p. 149).] was, indeed, the well-known salutation, while the words, 'The Lord is with thee' might waken the remembrance of the Angelic call, to great deliverance in the past, [a Judg. vi. 12.] But this designation of'highly favored' [3 Bengel aptly remarks, 'Non ut mater gratiae, sed ut filia gratiae.' Even Jeremy Taylor's remarks (Life of Christ, ed. Pickering, vol. i. p. 56) would here require modification. Following the best critical authorities, I have omitted the words, 'Blessed art thou among women.'] came upon her with bewildering surprise, perhaps not so much from its contrast to the humbleness of her estate, as from the self- conscious humility of her heart. And it was intended so, for of all feelings this would now most become her. Accordingly, it is this story of special 'favour' or grace, which the Angel traces in rapid outline, from the conception of the Virgin-Mother to the distinctive, Divinely-given Name, symbolic of the meaning of His coming; His absolute greatness; His acknowledgment as the Son of God; and the fulfillment in Him of the great Davidic hope, with its never-ceasing royalty, [1 We here refer, as an interesting corroboration, to the Targum on Ps. xlv. 7 (6 in our A. V.). But this interest is intensely increased when we read it, not as in our editions of the Targum, but as found in a MS. copy of the year 1208 (given by Levy in his Targum. Worterb. vol. i. p. 390 a). Translating it from that reading, the Targum thus renders Ps. xlv. 7, 'Thy throne, O God, in the heaven' (Levy renders, 'Thy throne from God in heaven,' but in either case it refers to the throne of the Messiah) 'is for ever and ever' (for 'world without end,' 'a rule of righteousness is the rule of Thy kingdom, O Thou King Messiah!'] and its never-ending, boundless Kingdom. [2 In Pirque' de R. El. c. 11, the same boundless dominion is ascribed to Messiah the King. In that curious passage dominion is ascribed to 'ten kings,' the first being God, the ninth the Messiah, and the tenth again God, to Whom the kingdom would be delivered in the end, according to Is. xliv. 6; Zechar. xiv. 9; Ezek. xxxiv. 24, with the result described in Is. Hi. 9.]
In all this, however marvellous, there could be nothing strange to those who cherished in their hearts Israel's great hope, not merely as an article of abstract belief, but as matter of certain fact, least of all to the maiden of the lineage of David, betrothed to him of the house and lineage of David. So long as the hand of prophetic blessing rested on the house of David, and before its finger had pointed to the individual who 'found favor' in the highest sense, the consciousness of possibilities, which scarce dared shape themselves into definite thoughts, must at times have stirred nameless feelings, perhaps the more often in circumstances of outward depression and humility, such as those of the 'Holy Family.' Nor was there anything strange even in the naming of the yet unconceived Child. It sounds like a saying current among the people of old, this of the Rabbis, [a Pirque' de R. El. 32, at the beginning] concerning the six whose names were given before their birth: Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and 'the Name of the Messiah, Whom may the Holy One, blessed be His Name, bring quickly in our days!' [3 Professor Wunsche's quotation is here not exact (u. s. p. 414)] But as for the deeper meaning of the name Jesus, [b St. Matt.
