Re: The New Year

Quoting Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...>:

> On Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:24:02 -0600 "Thomas R. Wier" <trwier@...>
> writes:
> > The concensus (if such it be) seems to be that it was precisely
> > 6 B.C., since that coincided with a conjunction of Jupiter and
> > the Moon in Ares, which to ancient astrologers was the sign of
>
> Which was the sign of Judea?  Jupiter, the Moon, or Ares?  Or the
> combination of all three?  And who considered it the sign of Judea?
I should clarify that I do not claim to support or oppose this theory.
However, as I understand it, the claim is that for Ancient astrologers,
the constellation of Ares was the/a sign of Judaea, and that the king
of the planets suggested to them that a king would be born in that
country, and that the conjunction suggested the importance of this king.
This theory, in other words, rejects the identification of the Biblical
"Star of Bethlehem" with a comet, asteroid, or supernova, which are the
traditional candidates.

 =========================================================================
Thomas Wier            "I find it useful to meet my subjects personally,
Dept. of Linguistics    because our secret police don't get it right
University of Chicago   half the time." -- octogenarian Sheikh Zayed of
1010 E. 59th Street     Abu Dhabi, to a French reporter.
Chicago, IL 60637