When the holy family was on its journey, and drew near to Judea, Joseph was alarmed by the information that “Archelaus did reign in the room of his father Herod,” and “he was afraid to go thither.”
The term used in the first clause implies, in the original, that Archelaus was king, or reigned in kingly power. And it is objected, that this is not exactly correct—for that Archelaus never was king. The case is this: As soon as his father was dead, Archelaus delivered to the soldiers a letter from the deceased king, in which he thanked them for their fidelity and services, and requested them to continue faithful to his son Archelaus, who was to be his successor. Herod’s will was at the same time publicly read, and Archelaus was hailed as king. This is surely sufficient authority for the statement. And although, in fact, Archelaus abstained from formally assuming the regal title, as it was necessary that the will of his father should be first confirmed by Augustus, and although eventually he only obtained from Rome the inferior title of ethnarch—yet it appears from Josephus, that his own subjects did not trouble themselves with these reserves and limitations, but continued to style him “king” from the time they hailed him by that title.
But why should Joseph be afraid to remain in Judea because Archelaus did reign? There was ample cause for apprehension of the surviving sons of Herod. This one had the reputation of being the most unscrupulous and relentless; and how well he deserved that character, a few days sufficed to show. His reign, indeed, like most other reigns, began with fair promises and golden hopes. On the eighth day after the mourning for Herod, Archelaus gave a feast to the people, and, seated on a golden throne in the temple, he promised them an administration more mild and equitable than that of his father. He, however, deferred the consideration of the various petitions that were presented to him till his authority should be confirmed by the Roman emperor. The people were, for the most part, willing to wait; but at the instigation of the Pharisees, they demanded the immediate deposition of the unpopular high-priest Joazar, as well as the punishment of the evil counsellors who had advised Herod to put to death the persons who had torn down the golden eagle which the king had set up over the eastern gate of the temple. Archelaus excused himself from compliance with either request, on the ground that he could not well take any public measures until he had been confirmed on the throne by Augustus. This was far from satisfying the people; and the tumult went on increasing, especially as the Jews who had come to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover took part with the disaffected. At length the soldiers stationed in the temple were treated with some insult, on hearing which Archelaus ordered the whole body of the royal guard to march into the temple, where they massacred about three thousand of the Jews there assembled, and dispersed the remainder.
Now, it will be recollected that the death of Herod took place just before the Passover; and Joseph being then commanded to return from Egypt, must, according to all reasonable probability, have reached the borders of Judea, just after the perpetration of this sanguinary act, which, we learn incidentally, was at the Passover, just previous to which Herod died. The news of it, therefore, must have met him on his approach, together with the intelligence that Archelaus did reign. Every one he met could talk of nothing else—every mouth was full of it; and dreadful as the fact was, it doubtless reached his ears with a thousand circumstances of aggravation. This, with the general character of the prince, may well have made Joseph doubt that he could safely execute his design of remaining in Judea; for there, every thing combined to render it probable that Archelaus would by no means hesitate to execute the purpose of his father, should it come to his knowledge, or should he even suspect, that the child was still alive whom Herod supposed he had destroyed.
Joseph’s doubts as to the right course to be taken under these circumstances were ended by the Divine intimation, that he should proceed into Galilee; in consequence of which he naturally repaired to the town in which he had formerly resided, and where he had friends and connections. This was Nazareth.
Galilee was obviously, under the circumstances, the best and safest place for the bringing up of the child Jesus. Herod Antipas, the tetrarch, though not a good man, was a person of mild disposition as compared with Archelaus, with whom he was, moreover, on terms so hostile that there was not the least likelihood that he would, even if demanded, give up the infant Christ into his power, while his own position would render him less sensible to the apprehension of the infant Messiah, which the ruler of Judea might be expected to entertain. This Herod Antipas was, however, destined to take some part in the history which the Gospel records. He is, in fact, the “Herod” named throughout the gospels, except in Matthew’s second chapter, where “Herod” designates his father. We shall hereafter meet with him as the persecutor of John the Baptist; and as the prince to whom Pilate sent Jesus in custody, when he heard that our Lord belonged to “his jurisdiction.”
We may not find a better opportunity of stating, that Archelaus reigned so tyrannically in Judea, that after two years the endurance of his people became utterly exhausted, and they lodged complaints against him at Rome, in consequence of which he was deposed, and banished to Vienne in Gaul, and his dominion was, as the people desired, made a province of Rome, the government of which was administered by Roman procurators. This was the political situation of Judea during the time of our Lord’s ministry. But Galilee remained under the separate government of Herod Antipas for many long years—not only nearly the whole period of our Lord’s life, but considerably after his death, even to the year 42 A.D., when, being accused at Rome, by his nephew Herod Agrippa, of a secret understanding with the Parthians, he was deposed and banished to Lyons in Gaul, and his tetrarchy, and all his property, given to his accuser, who is no other than the “Herod” of the twelfth chapter of Acts.