OF THK XATIVITV WAS 8 B.C. 



219 



spiritual allusions, and I had confined myself, for the sake of sim- 

 plicity, to ordinary historical considerations. The Rev. J. Tuckwell 

 and also Major-General Owen Hay suggest that people would 

 scatter in going to their old homes in order to enrol : this might 

 interfere with their a.<semhUiu/ tofjetlwr at the feast of Tabernacles 

 at Jerusalem. To this it is replied, Palestine is a small country ; so 

 small that any Jew could easily be present at his own town on the 

 first day of the Feast, and also be present at the Temple at 

 Jerusalem long before the close of the eight days of the feast. 

 The Rev. Harrington Lees, M.A., also writes drawing attention to 

 the fact that the northern Israelites at this period of the Nativity 

 were of the tv.-o tribes not of the ten."^ Consequently after enrol- 

 ment all would be near Jerusalem because the districts apportioned 

 to Judah and Benjamin were surrounding that city. 



On one occasion the Lord Jesus went up to Jerusalem at the 

 middle of the Feast of Tabernacles (John vii, 3, 8, 9, 10, 14r). So 

 others could have done the same in S B.C. after enrolment in their 

 old homes. 



Although it is now a vear and a half since the majority of the 

 arguments in favour of 8 B.C. have been published, no link in the 

 evidence has yet been shown to be unreliable ; on the contrary 

 the fresh line of investigation connected with the courses of the 

 priests has added further confirmation. 



It natiu'ally takes time to gain general acceptance for a date 

 which has until now been in doubt : most people cautiously wait 

 to see if any crushing argument can be brought against it. But 

 the claims of this date are already attracting attention ; for instance, 

 the Rev. Canon Sanday, Oxford, writes, " I am at present working 

 at other parts of the problem raised by the life of Oiu* Lord ; they 

 are quite distant parts, and I am afraid it would involve a 

 digression of a good many hours to form a deliljerate opinion on 

 the data which you lay before us so clearly. I am quite conscious 

 that I must do so sooner or later.'" Other scholars besides 

 Sir W. M. Ramsay have already pronoimced a distinctly favourable 

 judgment. Professor Flinders Petrie writes, " Many thanks for your 

 paper, which seems very satisfactory." The Rev. T. Xichol, D.D., 



* Luke the Plujsicia,u p. :^44, Sir AV. M. Kamsay. 



