FOOTNOTE:

[1] Joseph's marriage with the daughter of the priest of On might

show that the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh were believed to be

half-Egyptian by descent, but it is notoriously difficult to

determine how much is of ethnological value and how much belongs to

romance (viz. that of the individual Joseph).

JOSEPH, in the New Testament, the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus.

He is represented as a descendant of the house of David, and his

genealogy appears in two divergent forms in Matt. i. 1-17 and Luke iii.

23-38. The latter is probably much more complete and accurate in

details. The former, obviously artificial in structure (notice 3 × 14

generations), traces the Davidic descent through kings, and is governed

by an apologetic purpose. Of Joseph's personal history practically

nothing is recorded in the Bible. The facts concerning him common to the

two birth-narratives (Matt. i.-ii.; Luke i.-ii.) are: (a) that he was a

descendant of David, (b) that Mary was already betrothed to him when she

was found with child of the Holy Ghost, and (c) that he lived at

Nazareth after the birth of Christ; but these facts are handled

differently in each case. It is noticeable that, in Matthew, Joseph is

prominent (e.g. he receives an annunciation from an angel), while in

Luke's narrative he is completely subordinated. Bp Gore (_The

Incarnation_, Bampton lecture for 1891, p. 78) points out that Matthew

narrates everything from Joseph's side, Luke from Mary's, and infers

that the narrative of the former may ultimately be based on Joseph's

account, that of the latter on Mary's. The narratives seem to have been

current (in a poetical form) among the early Jewish-Christian community

of Palestine. At Nazareth Joseph followed the trade of a carpenter

(Matt. xiii. 55). It is probable that he had died before the public

ministry of Christ; for no mention is made of him in passages relating

to this period where the mother and brethren of Jesus are introduced;

and from John xix. 26 it is clear that he was not alive at the time of

the Crucifixion.

Joseph was the father of several children (Matt. xiii. 55), but

according to ecclesiastical tradition by a former marriage. The reading

of Matt. i. 16, in the Sinaitic Palimpsest (_Joseph ... begat Jesus, who

is called the Christ_) also makes him the natural father of Jesus, and

this was the view of certain early heretical sects, but it seems never

to have been held in orthodox Christian circles. According to various

apocryphal gospels (conveniently collected in B. H. Cowper's _The

Apocryphal Gospels_, 1881), when married to Mary he was a widower

already 80 years of age, and the father of four sons and two daughters;

his first wife's name was Salome and she was a connexion of the family

of John the Baptist.

In the Roman Catholic Church the 19th of March has since 1642 been a

feast in Joseph's honour. Two other festivals in his honour have also

been established (the Patronage of St Joseph, 3rd Sunday after Easter,

and the Betrothal of Mary and Joseph, 23rd of January). In December 1870

St Joseph was proclaimed Patron of the whole Church. (G. H. Bo.)

JOSEPH OF ARIMATHAEA,[1] in the New Testament, a wealthy Jew who had

been converted by Jesus Christ. He is mentioned by the Four Evangelists,

who are in substantial agreement concerning him: after the Crucifixion

he went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus, subsequently prepared

it for burial and laid it in a tomb. There are, however, minor

differences in the accounts, which have given rise to controversy.

Matthew (xxvii. 60) says that the tomb was Joseph's own; Mark (xv. 43

seq.), Luke (xxiii. 50 seq.) say nothing of this, while John (xix. 41)

simply says that the body was laid in a sepulchre "nigh at hand." Both

Mark and Luke say that Joseph was a "councillor" ([Greek: euschêmôn

bouleutês], Mark xv. 43), and the Gospel of Peter describes him as a

"friend of Pilate and of the Lord." This last statement is probably a

late invention, and there is considerable difficulty as to "councillor."

That Joseph was a member of the Sanhedrin is improbable. Luke indeed,

regarding him as such, says that he "had not consented to their counsel

and deed," but Mark (xiv. 64) says that _all_ the Sanhedrin "condemned

him to be worthy of death." Perhaps the phrase "noble councillor" is

intended to imply merely a man of wealth and position. Again Matthew

says that Joseph was a disciple, while Mark implies that he was not yet

among the definite adherents of Christ, and John describes him as an

adherent "secretly for fear of the Jews." Most likely he was a disciple,

but belonged only to the wider circle of adherents. The account given in

the Fourth Gospel suggests that the writer, faced with these various

difficulties, assumed a double tradition: (1) that Joseph of Arimathaea,

a wealthy disciple, buried the body of Christ; (2) that the person in

question was Joseph of Arimathaea a "councillor," and solved the problem

by substituting Nicodemus as the councillor; hence he describes both

Joseph and Nicodemus (xix. 39) as co-operating in the burial. Some

critics (e.g. Strauss, _New Life of Jesus_, ch. 96) have thrown doubt

upon the story, regarding some of the details as invented to suit the

prophecy in Isa. liii. 9, "they made his grave with the wicked, and with

the rich in his death" (for various translations, see Hastings's _Dict.

Bible_, ii. 778). But in the absence of any reference to this prophecy

in the Gospels, this view is unconvincing, though the correspondence is

remarkable.

The striking character of this single appearance of Joseph of Arimathaea

led to the rise of numerous legends. Thus William of Malmesbury says

that he was sent to Britain by St Philip, and, having received a small

island in Somersetshire, there constructed "with twisted twigs" the

first Christian church in Britain--afterwards to become the Abbey of

Glastonbury. The legend says that his staff, planted in the ground,

became a thorn flowering twice a year (see GLASTONBURY). This

tradition--which is given only as such by Malmesbury himself--is not

confirmed, and there is no mention of it in either Gildas or Bede.

Joseph also plays a large part in the various versions of the Legend of

the Holy Grail (see GRAIL, THE HOLY).

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Joints" to "Justinian I." Volume 15, Slice 5 · 第 11 / 34 题