Traditional Christian nativity scenes give a convenient
visual summary of people and events connected with the birth of Jesus. They
generally include Mary, Joseph, and the infant Jesus, with a manger and
animals, often accompanied by shepherds, angels, and magi.
As with any shorthand representation of reality, a nativity
scene sacrifices some precision and detail for the sake of simplicity. Nativity
scenes that include both shepherds and magi collapse together two separate
events, since the magi probably arrived in Bethlehem
some months after the shepherds. A more accurate portrayal would require two
separate scenes, one at a manger and another at the house visited by the magi
(Matt. 2:11).
In between the two Bethlehem
snapshots we could insert a third scene, at the temple complex in Jerusalem.
About six weeks after the birth of Jesus, his family traveled from Bethlehem
to Jerusalem to present the
offerings prescribed in Lev. 12 (Luke 2:22-24).
In this scene Jesus and his parents are joined by Simeon, an old man who
blesses God for the coming of the Messiah and prophesies about the implications
of Jesus' birth (Luke 2:25-35); and by Anna, an elderly widow who also rejoices
in the birth of the Messiah.
Although this third scene is sometimes overlooked-it is not
included in the movie The Nativity Story,
for example-it has much to teach us. From the fact that Joseph and Mary made
the trip to Jerusalem, we learn
that they were observant Jews, careful to carry out the requirements of the Torah.
From the fact that they could not afford a lamb for the offering (Luke 2:24; Lev. 12:8), we find out that they were
not wealthy.1 Simeon's
prophecy highlights the importance of the birth of the Messiah as well as the
trials and challenges that Jews in general-and Mary in particular-would face as
a result of that birth.
And what about Anna? Luke's
description of her is brief:
"There was also a prophetess,
Anna the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher.
She was very old, having been married to her husband for seven years until his
death. She had lived as a widow since then for eighty-four years. She never
left the temple, worshiping with fasting and prayer night and day. At that
moment, she came up to them and began to give thanks to God and to speak about
the child to all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem" (Luke
2:36-38, NETBible).
It turns out, however, that these few verses have a great
deal to tell us about where Anna was from, why she was named Anna, why she was
drawn to the temple, and what the birth of Jesus meant for her personally. My
purpose in this article is to explore, with the help of some fascinating
research by New Testament scholar Richard Bauckham
([1], [2]), what Luke intended to communicate in his short account of Anna.
Anna's Name and Tribe
To begin, we note that Anna's name can also be written in English
as "Hannah". The original biblical Hannah, mother of the prophet
Samuel, was a prophetess herself (I Sam. 2:1-10). It is very likely that Luke
intended his readers to connect the two, since he seems to emphasize the
parallels between Samuel and Jesus in Luke 1-2. The parallels between I Sam.
1-3 and Luke 1-2 include the following [4]:
· The births of both Samuel and Jesus
were miraculous, and both were accompanied by great thanksgiving.
· Both Samuel and Jesus were presented
before God by their parents (I Sam. 1:22,24; Luke 2:22).
The parents of both received a blessing during their visits to the house of God
(I Sam. 2:20; Luke 2:34).
· With their parents not present, both
Samuel and Jesus were active at the house of God at relatively early ages (I
Sam. 3; Luke 2:42-49).
· Both were said to have "grown in
favor with God and man" as they grew up (I Sam. 2:26; 3:19; Luke 2:40,52).2
There is additional significance in the name Anna in Luke 2, as we shall see
soon. To understand this significance, we will need to consider another piece
of information from Luke 2:36: the fact that Anna came from the tribe of Asher,
one of the northern tribes of Israel.
What did this detail mean to the original readers of the Gospel of Luke?
Bauckham ([1], pp. 163-164)
explains that in the time of Jesus, Jews did not think of the northern tribes
as being "lost." A first-century Jew who heard about a person from
the tribe of Asher living in Jerusalem
would have had some good guesses about that person's background. Bauckham carefully examines what those guesses might have
been.
One possibility is that Anna could have come from
northwestern Galilee, the traditional homeland of the
tribe of Asher. Many people from this region were taken captive by the Assyrian
king Tiglath-Pileser in about 733 B.C. (see e.g. 2
Kings 15:29), but others were left
behind. When King Hezekiah of Judah organized a special Passover celebration at
Jerusalem about twenty years later, he invited people from the northern tribes,
and a few-including some from the tribe of Asher-made the trip to Jerusalem (2 Chron. 30:10-11).
Galilee was inhabited mostly by
Gentiles by the time of the Maccabees in the second
century B.C., but there was apparently still an Israelite minority living in
the region (see I Macc. 5:21-23). When the Hasmoneans
took control of Galilee, they replaced pagan settlements
by Jewish ones, bringing in many Jewish families from Judea
([1], p. 165).
By Jesus' time there was a lot of friction between
Israelites and Gentiles in the Galilee region. An
Israelite from a family that had maintained its tribal identity through the
centuries undoubtedly would have been very patriotic and loyal to Jerusalem
and the temple. Bauckham observes that it would not
have been surprising that "a Galilean prophet, expecting the redemption of
Israel from pagan rule, should move to the religious heart of the nation and
the expected centre of God's eschatological restoration of the nation, in order
to spend her time in the temple ..." ([1], p. 165).
Exiles in Media: The Tobit
Connection
The other main possibility is that Anna came from a family whose
ancestors had been taken into captivity by the Assyrians. 2 Kings 15:29 does
not mention precisely where people from Galilee were taken, but it is
reasonable to suppose that they ended up settling together with the second wave
of exiles from the northern tribes that came just twelve years later. Of these
Israelites, we read the following in 2 Kings 18:11
(NETBible):
"The king of Assyria
deported the people of Israel
to Assyria. He settled them in Halah,
along the Habor (the river
of Gozan),
and in the cities of the Medes."
As the centuries went by, it was with the third of these
locations-Media, a territory that today is part of Iran
[3]- that the exiles from the northern tribes came to
be associated. For example, the historian Josephus wrote in the late first century
A.D. that the captives from the northern tribes had been taken "into Media
and Persia"
(Ant. 9.14.1).
One main evidence of and source for the association of the
northern tribes with Media was the popular story of Tobit.3
In the Book of Tobit, Tobit is a Galilean
from the tribe of Naphtali who is taken captive to
the Assyrian city of Nineveh (Tobit1:10).
Relatives of his have settled in the Median cities of Ecbatana (3:7) and Rages (4:1;
5:6). At the end of the book, Tobit on his deathbed
instructs his son Tobias to take his family to Media, which Tobit
believes will be the safest place to go after the prophesied destruction of Nineveh
takes place (14:3-4). Tobias obeys, moving to Ecbatana where his in-laws live (14:12-15).
Bauckham observes that
"awareness of tribal membership may be more likely to have survived in the
eastern diaspora than in Galilee"
([1], p. 169). Many exiles in Media, in the midst of an alien culture hundreds
of miles from Israel,
apparently banded together in communities and worked to preserve their
Israelite identity. Such a picture is certainly reflected in the Book of Tobit, where Tobit and his family
have a detailed knowledge of their ancestry and are concerned about marrying
within their tribe.
At some point the Median exiles established formal ties with
Jerusalem and the Temple.
Bauckham believes this connection with Jerusalem
may have begun sometime during the Persian period, after exiles from the House
of Judah had returned to Israel
and rebuilt the Temple. Josephus
records that when Ezra led another group of Jews back to Israel
from Babylon (c. 458 B.C.), they
were accompanied by some members of the northern tribes from Media (Ant.
11.5.2).4 Perhaps these returnees from the
northern tribes helped facilitate a relationship between Jerusalem
and the Median diaspora community.
Media was viewed as a very remote location by people in Judea,
especially because the trip between Media and Jerusalem
had to be made entirely by land.5 Still,
there was regular communication back and forth between religious leaders in Judea
and Israelites throughout the diaspora, including
Media. One interesting example is a letter written by Gamaliel
the Elder (the teacher of the apostle Paul) dealing with a calendar issue ([1],
pp. 174-175). Gamaliel's letter, which makes the
announcement that an extra month is being inserted in the calendar that year,
is addressed to "our brothers belonging to the exile of Babylonia and
belonging to the exile of Media and all the other exiles of Israel."
An attachment to Jerusalem
among pious Israelites in Media is reflected in-and was probably promoted
by-the Book of Tobit. At the beginning of the book, Tobit explains that his tribe of Naphtali
had gone into captivity because it had abandoned Jerusalem
and the Temple and fallen into
idolatry (Tobit 1:4-5). He knows that Israel's
exile resulted from its sins (3:4) and fulfilled prophecies of the scriptures
(2:6), all of which God would faithfully carry out (14:4). Tobit
finds hope in the prophecies, which also assert that Israelites will one day be
able to return to Jerusalem, where
all nations will worship the true God (13:1-17; 14:5-7). In the meantime, he
advocates that his countrymen hasten the fulfillment of these prophecies by
obeying God, in particular by being generous to the poor (13:6; 14:8-11).
For Median Israelites who felt as Tobit
did, there were several ways to express a connection with Jerusalem.
One was to pay the annual half shekel temple tax. Josephus reports that this
money was collected in the eastern diaspora at the
cities of Nehardea and Nisibis,
from whence it was transported to Jerusalem
(Ant. 18.9.1). In Jerusalem,
sacrifices were offered on behalf of the people in the diaspora.
Given sufficient funds, an Israelite could achieve a more
direct connection with the Temple
by personally undertaking the long trek to Jerusalem
for Passover, Pentecost, or the Feast of Tabernacles. People who did so were
again following the example of Tobit, who had
faithfully journeyed to Jerusalem
for the pilgrim festivals before he was taken into captivity (Tobit 1:6). Acts 2:9 mentions that the pilgrims who came to
Jerusalem for Pentecost in the year
of Christ's resurrection included Medes.
Finally, there were a few who had the means and inclination
to actually move to Jerusalem. One
example preserved in Jewish tradition is Rabbi Nahum the Mede, who taught in Jerusalem
during the final years of the SecondTemple
(see Nazir 5:4 in the Mishnah).
Judging from his name, either he or his parents had moved from Media to Jerusalem.
Bauckham ([1], pp. 179-180)
observes that Nahum was an ideal name for a Median Israelite. The prophet Nahum
had predicted the destruction of Nineveh,
as emphasized in Tobit 14:4, 15. The fulfillment of
this prophecy was very significant for the exiles in Media, because it provided
evidence that God would also carry out his promises to bring them back from
captivity. In addition, the name "Nahum" means "comfort" or
"consolation." The corresponding verb is often used in the book of
Isaiah in the expression of promises of the restoration of Jerusalem
and the return of the exiles (Isa. 40:1; 49:13; 51:3,12; 52:9; 61:2; 66:13). By the first century, the words
"comfort" and "consolation" had become synonymous with the
deliverance brought by the Messiah. (For example, Simeon in
Luke 2:25 looks forward to the consolation
of Israel.) The parents of Nahum the Mede expressed their faith in
the fulfillment of God's promises by giving their son the name Nahum.
Based on all of this information, it seems quite plausible
that Anna could have belonged to a family from the Median diaspora
that at some point migrated to Jerusalem, as the family of Nahum the Mede had
done.
Anna the Mede?
We have discussed two possible scenarios for the background of Anna
the prophetess in Luke 2:36-38. Perhaps Anna's family hailed from the
traditional territory of the tribe of Asher in Galilee.
Or perhaps her family went into exile in Media, then
later came back to Israel.
Which is more likely? Here it turns out that Anna's name is
an important clue that may help us decide the answer to this question.
Bauckham points out that, as far
as we know, the name Anna/Hannah was not especially popular in Israel during
the late Second Temple Period: "Of the 247 Jewish women in Palestine from
the period 330 BCE-200 CE, whose names are known, our Anna is the only one who
bears this name" ([1], p. 178).
On the other hand, there is reason to believe that the name
Anna could have been popular among religious Israelites in the eastern diaspora, the people for whom the Book of Tobit was especially meaningful. In the Book of Tobit, Anna is the name of Tobit's
wife!
This fact helps tip the scale in favor of our second scenario,
the one in which Anna comes from a family that moved back to Israel
from Media. Just as it would be natural for such a family to name a son Nahum,
so it would be natural for a family from this background to name a daughter
Anna.
While we are thinking about names, we should also consider
the possible significance of Phanuel, the name of
Anna's father. The name Phanuel was not a popular
one, as far as we know. It appears in two biblical genealogies, one from the
tribe of Judah (I Chron. 4:4) and the other from the
tribe of Benjamin (I Chron. 8:25). Bauckham knows of only
one other instance of this name besides the one in Luke 2. It appears on an ostracon
(an inscribed piece of pottery) from Beersheba
from the late eighth century B.C. ([1], p. 180).
Would this name have had a special meaning for an Israelite
from the Median diaspora? Phanuel
means "face of God," which in the Hebrew Scriptures is a metaphor for
the favor (or disfavor) of God. For example, a familiar line in the Aaronic benediction (Num. 6:24-26),
"May the Lord make his face shine upon you, and be gracious unto you"
is a prayer for God's favor.
This metaphor often appears in the Hebrew Scriptures in
connection with the themes of exile and return ([1], p. 181):
· In Deut. 31:17-18; 32:20, a future
captivity of Israel
is described in terms of God hiding his face.
· Psalm 80, a psalm that exiled
Israelites could have sung as a prayer for return from captivity, has the
following refrain: "Restore us, O God; make your face shine upon us, that
we may be saved" (v. 3, NIV; cf. vv. 7, 19).
· When King Hezekiah invited the people
who remained from the northern tribes to his special Passover celebration, he exhorted them to repent so that their
friends who were in exile would be able to come back (2 Chron.
30:6-9). God "will not turn his face from you, if you return to him,"
Hezekiah wrote (v. 9, NRSV).
· In interceding for Jerusalem
and for his people in exile, Daniel prays, "let your face shine upon your
desolated sanctuary" (Dan. 9:17,
NRSV).
These examples suggest that for Israelites in Media, the name Phanuel could have expressed a hope that God would show
favor to his people and bring them back to the land
of Israel. Similar "face of
God" imagery appears in the Book of Tobit (3:6;
4:7; 13:16).
The Annotated Anna
We can now understand more fully what Luke intended to communicate
in his brief passage about Anna in Luke 2:36-38. Phanuel
and Anna came from a family of the tribe of Asher that had lived in the eastern
diaspora in Media. Like other exiles from the
northern tribes, they treasured the story of Tobit. Phanuel told this story often to his daughter, whom he
named after Tobit's wife. Like Tobit,
he longed for the time when the exiles in Media would be able to return home to
Israel, so he
was overjoyed when he was able to actually move to Jerusalem.
He passed along to Anna his love for Jerusalem,
the Torah, and the Temple.
In her widowhood, Anna expressed this love in her continual worship at the Temple
complex.
When Anna met Joseph and Mary and God revealed to her that
their baby was the promised Messiah, she rejoiced in the wonderful news. God
had shined his face upon Israel,
as her father's name expressed. He was fulfilling his promises and would surely
bring his people back to the land of Israel.
Bauckham ([1], p. 185) observes
that the accounts of Simeon and Anna in Luke 2 complement each other nicely.
Simeon, a member of the House of Judah, highlights Israel's
role as a light to the nations (2:30-32).
Through the work of the Messiah, salvation would go out from Jerusalem
to all the world. Anna, a member of the House of
Israel, represents Israel
in exile, scattered among the nations. Through the work of the Messiah, Israel
one day would come back to Jerusalem.
With his accounts of Simeon and Anna, Luke beautifully communicates the hopes
of all Israel.
References:
1.Richard Bauckham, "Anna of the Tribe of
Asher (Luke 2:36-38)," Revue
Biblique104 (1997), pp. 161-191.
2.Richard Bauckham, Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in
the Gospels, Eerdmans, Grand
Rapids, Michigan, 2002.
3.Gerald M. Bilkes, "Medes, Media" in Eerdmans
Dictionary of the Bible, David Noel Freedman, Editor, Eerdmans,
Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2000.
4.Craig A. Evans, Luke,
New International Biblical Commentary, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody,
Massachusetts, 1990.
Footnotes:
1This
is also an indication that the magi arrived in Bethlehem
later. If the magi had already come and presented their gifts, Joseph and Mary
might have purchased a lamb.
2For more on Samuel as
a type and forerunner of the Messiah and on the prophecies of I Sam. 2, see the
article "Samuel
and the Gospel" in Issue 7 of Grace
& Knowledge.
4This is a detail not
found in the scriptures-see Ezra 8-although it may be hinted at in I Chron. 9:3. Bauckham speculates
that Josephus might have been acquainted with people in Jerusalem
whose ancestors had come from the Median diaspora
([1], p. 172).
5Bauckham
([1], pp. 173-174) mentions a story preserved in the Talmud about a rabbi in Israel
whose father lived in western Media. When the father died, his son didn't find
out about his death until three years later.
