---

In a previous post, I addressed the claim that no star could exist that moves or behaves in the way described in Matthew’s Gospel. I argued that Matthew’s Gospel uses language found in Greco-Roman writings to describe comets, and that a comet could act in the way Matthew described. I also argued that we have good evidence for the existence of a comet in 5 BC, the time Jesus was born.

However, the idea that the star in Matthew’s Gospel was a comet faces an important challenge:

At this time in history (and all the way into the Middle Ages), comets were regarded as omens of doom and destruction—the very opposite of good tidings. This was in part because of comet behavior. They were perceived in ancient times as breaking into the sky, ignoring the highly ordered and repetitive clockwork movement of the heavens. The Almighty could have chosen to use an ominous sign for the birth of Christ. Presumably, He can do whatever He likes. But if the purpose of the Star was to communicate something joyful to humankind, a comet seems an unlikely choice.

There are two claims encapsulated in this objection:

• First, that at this time in history (the 1st century BC) comets were universally interpreted as negative omens.
• Second, that this is contrary to how the star is presented in Matthew’s Gospel.

 This post will address the first of these claims. The second will be addressed in a later post.

Were Comets Universally Interpreted as Negative Omens?

First, the claim that comets were universally interpreted as negative omens is misleading. In the first century BC, comets were almost universally seen as threats to the established political order. According to the 1st-century astrological poem Astronomica, they were harbingers of significant political upheaval affecting entire nations, and particularly kings—such things as the collapse of social order, civil wars, rebellion, death of kings, the arising of rivals to the throne, and the overthrow or replacement of kings.[1]

The fact that comets signify political upheavals that threaten the current political order means they are a bad omen for the current political order and particularly for incumbent rulers. However, it does not mean they signify something that is bad for everyone. On some occasions, the downfall of one ruler could be construed as beneficial to another. When this happened, the beneficiary could interpret comets as a positive omen.

Several examples will illustrate this:

Example 1: Mithridates VI
First, consider  these coins minted by Mithridates VI (134–63 BCE). Mithridates fought a series of wars against the Romans. In his day, Persian and Zoroastrian traditions were being interpreted to predict a king who would overthrow Rome (this is interesting because the Magi were Zoroastrian priests). Mithridates promoted himself as the fulfillment of these prophecies. You’ll notice the coins have stars on them. As part of this promotion, Mithridates minted comets on these coins.

The context is provided by the Roman historian Justin:

The future greatness of this prince even signs from heaven had foretold; for in the year in which he was born, as well as in that in which he began to reign, a comet blazed forth with such splendour, for seventy successive days on each occasion, that the whole sky seemed to be on fire. It covered a fourth part of the firmament with its train, and obscured the light of the sun with its effulgence; and in rising and setting it took up the space of four hours.[2]

Justin writes around AD 160–230. However, he is paraphrasing from Pompeius Trogus’ work The Philippic Histories, written in the first century BC. Justin refers to two comets, one at Mithridates’ birth and another at his ascension. The existence of such comets used to be dismissed as legendary. However, subsequent studies of Chinese astrological records have confirmed that two such comets did appear at the time of his birth and ascension.[3] So, Mithridates and Trogus are referencing a real celestial event.

What is important for us is how this event was interpreted. Justin cites a first-century author stating that a comet which appears for 70 days was a sign from heaven foretelling the rise of a great prince. For Rome, this was an ominous sign. Justin said Mithridates had an exceptional destiny. This destiny resulted in the attempted overthrow of Roman power in the eastern Mediterranean. Mithridates successfully overthrew and conquered several neighboring kingdoms and Roman-controlled territories, expanding his realm into a major empire around the Black Sea and Asia Minor. He also massacred tens of thousands of Roman citizens. This was bad news for the established Roman status quo. Mithridates was an obvious threat to the political order.

Mithridates obviously viewed his mission differently. He did not view the comets as a negative omen. The idea that he was a serious threat to Roman power in the eastern Mediterranean was something he embraced. In effect, he is saying: “The cosmic sign that terrified the world was about me—I am the terror to your Roman oppressors.” This was a bad omen for the Romans but a positive one for their enemies. By minting coins bearing these comets, Mithridates shows he expected his subjects to interpret them in the same way he did.

The takeaway is this: In the first century BC, a comet could be interpreted by people in the East as signifying the birth of a new ruler who would rise to overthrow and replace the existing rulers. This would be a negative omen for the existing social order and the incumbent rulers. However, it could also simultaneously be embraced as a positive sign by partisans of the new king.

Example 2: Augustus Caesar
Consider next these coins  from Augustus Caesar (63 BC–AD 14), who was the Roman Emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth. Augustus promoted himself as “son of God,” “saviour of the world,” “lord,” and described his reign as “the good news”[4] that Augustus had ushered in peace and stability. These coins are part of that promotion. Notice the coins have comets on them. Why? Pliny explains:

The deified Augustus had deemed this comet very propitious to himself; as it had appeared at the beginning of his rule, at some games which, not long after the decease of his father Caesar, as a member of the college founded by him he was celebrating in honour of Venus Genetrix. In fact he made public the joy that it gave him in these words: “On the very days of my Games a comet was visible for seven days in the northern part of the sky. It was rising about an hour before sunset, and was a bright star, visible from all lands. The common people believed that this star signified the soul of Caesar received among the spirits of the immortal gods, and on this account the emblem of a star was added to the bust of Caesar that we shortly afterwards dedicated in the forum.” This was his public utterance, but privately he rejoiced because he interpreted the comet as having been born for his own sake and as containing his own birth within it; and, to confess the truth, it did have a health-giving influence over the world.[5]

Pliny refers to a bright comet that appeared around 44 BC, commonly referred to as the Sidus Iulium (“Julian Star”) or Caesaris astrum (“Caesar’s star”) in ancient literature. The existence of this comet has been confirmed from Chinese records.[6] It appeared shortly after Julius Caesar’s assassination and was interpreted by the common people as evidence that Julius Caesar had been made a god. Augustus was Julius Caesar’s adopted son. So the inference can be made that he (Augustus) was declared the son of God. Pliny says that, in contrast to the common interpretation, Augustus himself took the comet as signifying him and as “containing his birth,” and Pliny accepts that the omen had foretold the positive influence his life and reign would have over the world.

Here Caesaris astrum is viewed as a positive omen, signifying the benefits of Augustus’ reign. However, in the previous paragraph, Pliny has described comets as “a terrifying star and not easily expiated,” because “they overturn kingdoms, stir up wars, and change the condition of peoples.” As examples, he mentions comets that appeared during the civil war of 87 BC where Octavius was overthrown and replaced by Marius; the struggle between Caesar and Pompey, where Caesar gained control of Rome making himself emperor; and the poisoning of Claudius where Nero took control of the empire. These are all cases of significant political upheaval resulting in a change in regime.

Is Pliny contradicting himself here? I don’t think so. Both these things can be true at the same time. Caesar’s death did herald political upheaval. It resulted in the War of Mutina, the Second Triumvirate, and the civil war between Antony and Octavian. These resulted in the end of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Roman Empire. Augustus rose victorious from these struggles and was the beneficiary of these upheavals.

So, in Pliny we see both that comets were terrible signs predicting political upheaval involving an overthrow of the current kingdom and, at the same time, that they could be reinterpreted or reframed as positive signs of endorsement for the ruler who benefits from the change and also as signs of whatever benefits his reign brings about.

Example 3: Tacitus and Nero — The Comet of AD 60
Tacitus records a comet during the reign of Nero Caesar around AD 60:

Meanwhile, a comet blazed into view—in the opinion of the crowd, an apparition boding change to monarchies. Hence, as though Nero were already dethroned, men began to inquire on whom the next choice should fall; and the name in all mouths was that of Rubellius Plautus, who, on the mother’s side, drew his nobility from the Julian house. … A belief spread that he was the candidate marked out by the will of deity; and he found numerous supporters in the class of men who nurse the eager and generally delusive ambition to be the earliest parasites of a new and precarious power. Nero, therefore, perturbed by the reports, drew up a letter to Plautus, advising him “to consult the peace of the capital and extricate himself from the scandal-mongers: he had family estates in Asia, where he could enjoy his youth in safety and quiet.” To Asia, accordingly, he retired with his wife Antistia and a few of his intimate friends.[7]

Nero proceeds to have Plautus murdered while in exile.

The same pattern is seen here. Tacitus tells us that a comet was widely understood as an “apparition boding change to monarchies.” This is clearly a negative omen for the current king, Nero. It signals to the people that he has been dethroned by the gods and will be replaced by a rival king. Nero is “perturbed” and attempts to eliminate rivals. However, the same omen is simultaneously interpreted by the same people as a divine endorsement of the new king and so gives their support to Plautus. The reason Nero exiles and murders Rubellius Plautus is because the people believe he is the candidate “marked out by the deity” and he wins “numerous supporters” as a result.

So, in the first century AD, comets could and were interpreted as a sign that a king would be replaced by a new rival. This could be and was interpreted as a negative sign by the current king—so much so that he might murder potential rivals. At the same time, it could also, and did, signal divine endorsement of the rival, and hence motivate people to support him.

Example 4: Josephus and the Zealots
A fourth example is Josephus. In a previous post, I mentioned Josephus’ reference to Halley’s Comet as “a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city.” The full context is:

Thus were the miserable people persuaded by these deceivers, and such as belied God himself; while they did not attend nor give credit to the signs that were so evident, and did so plainly foretell their future desolation, but, like men infatuated, without either eyes to see or minds to consider, did not regard the denunciations that God made to them. Thus there was a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city, and a comet, that continued a whole year.[8]

He goes on to explain this:

But now, what did the most elevate them in undertaking this war, was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in their sacred writings, how “about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth.” The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular, and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination. Now this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea. However, it is not possible for men to avoid fate, although they see it beforehand.[9]

Again, we see the same pattern. Both Josephus and the Zealots interpret the star (or comet) as a sign that a new king would rise up who would become governor of the earth. G. J. Goldberg explains that both Josephus and the Zealots’ interpretation is shaped by Jewish apocalyptic tradition.[10]⁸ The oracle of Balaam—“a star shall come out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel” (Num. 24:17)—was widely used in Second Temple literature to predict the coming of a ruler. In this context, a star could naturally be understood as the sign preceding a messianic ruler.

The difference between them is over who the relevant king is. The Zealots take the comet as an omen from God that Roman rule in Judea will be overthrown. This would be a negative omen for Rome. Consequently, they see it as a divine endorsement of their decision to rebel, and a positive omen for them. By contrast, Josephus sees the comet as an omen that the regime in Jerusalem will be overthrown—a negative sign sent from God against the Zealots. However, Josephus simultaneously understands the comet to be a sign of endorsement for Vespasian; it predicted his ascension to the throne.

So, in first-century Judaism, a comet could be and was interpreted as a sign that a new king would arise and replace the current regime. This could be and was interpreted in light of messianic expectations. Such a comet was a negative sign for the current rulers who would be overthrown or replaced, but it would also be a sign of endorsement for the new regime.

Example 5: Chaeremon of Alexandria
My final example is Chaeremon of Alexandria, who was one of the leading Stoic philosophers of the first century AD—and significantly, a tutor to the young Nero prior to AD 47. One of Chaeremon’s works was a treatise On Comets. No surviving manuscripts of this work exist; however, fragments of it occur in the writings of Origen. Origen writes:

It has been observed that, on the occurrence of great events, and of mighty changes in terrestrial things, such stars are wont to appear, indicating either the removal of dynasties or the breaking out of wars, or the happening of such circumstances as may cause commotions upon the earth. But we have read in the Treatise on Comets by Chæremon the Stoic, that on some occasions also, when good was to happen, comets made their appearance; and he gives an account of such instances. If, then, at the commencement of new dynasties, or on the occasion of other important events, there arises a comet so called, or any similar celestial body, why should it be matter of wonder that at the birth of Him who was to introduce a new doctrine to the human race…[11]

Again, we have the same pattern: Origen tells us that, in his day, comets were understood to indicate significant upheavals in terrestrial affairs, such as “the removing of dynasties.” This causes “commotion” and hence indicates negative things are to occur. However, he tells us that Chaeremon had documented and taught that comets could also indicate that “good was about to happen,” such as at the “commencement of new dynasties.” This is the pattern we have seen above. In each case, a comet has been seen; in each case, it is taken as a negative omen for the dynasty being removed, but also as an endorsement of the replacement.

---

[1] Manilius, Astronomica 1.809–814; 2.150–159, trans. G. P. Goold (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977), 67–69, 123–25.

[2] Justin, Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus 37.2.1–3, trans. J. C. Yardley (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994), 197.

[3] Ho Peng Yoke, “Ancient and Mediaeval Observations of Comets and Novae in Chinese Sources,” Vistas in Astronomy 5 (1962): 127–225.

[4] Here I am not putting a Christian “spin” on Augustus’s claims. It is common place in New Testament studies to observe that the Messianic language used by early Christians to describe Christ is the same language used to describe the roman emperor and the imperial cult.

[5] Pliny, Natural History 2.93–94, trans. H. Rackham (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1938), 207–09.

[6] Ho Peng Yoke, “Ancient and Mediaeval Observations,” 144–45.

[7] Tacitus, Annals 14.22, trans. J. Jackson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1937), 283–85.

[8] Josephus, Jewish War 6.288–300, trans. H. St. J. Thackeray (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1928), 459–63.

[9] Josephus, Jewish War 6.288–300, trans. H. St. J. Thackeray (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1928), 459–63.

[10] G. J. Goldberg, “The Star of Bethlehem and Josephus,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 13 (1995): 59–77

[11] Origen, Contra Celsum 1.58, trans. Henry Chadwick (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953), 39.

 

 

 

 

 

Tags:   Christian History · Christmas · Matthew's Gospel · Nativity · Star of BethlehemNo Comments