The Return from Egypt (Notes)

Saint Matthew - Chapter 2

''The return of the Holy Family was doubtless far less fatiguing than the journey to Egypt.. In the first place the Holy Child was older and the road was now a little better. On leaving Old Cairo to go towards Pelusium, the travellers first traversed sandy districts, passing salt marshes, and then followed the coast by way of Gaza and Jaffa, till they entered Samaria. There they left the open country, and made their way through numerous  valleys beyond it and came to Jenin, whence they entered and crossed the Plain of Esdrælon. Nazareth, for which they were bound, was then quite near, beyond a few mountain spurs. The journey probably occupied about seven days.''
[Taken from The Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by J. James Tissot, Sampson, Low, Marston, London, 1897]

Cairo Citadel, from Mt Mokatam. J-J Tissot

[19] Defuncto autem Herode, ecce angelus Domini apparuit in somnis Joseph in Aegypto,
But when Herod was dead,[1] behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph in Egypt,

[20] dicens : Surge, et accipe puerum, et matrem ejus, et vade in terram Israel : defuncti sunt enim qui quaerebant animam pueri.
Saying: Arise, and take the child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel. For they are dead [2] that sought the life of the child.



[1] Now when Herod was dead, &c. (verses 19, 20). Herod died a few days after the slaughter of Antipater, as Josephus says, and so but a few days after the murder of the Innocents, as is clear from Macrobius. Hence Christ does not appear to have remained in Egypt more than two years. For He did not go there more than one year before Herod’s death; and after Herod’s death, when Archelaus his son had been to Rome and returned, Christ came back from Egypt, as the Gospel here states. Thus Onuphrius Pavinus, (in his Fasti), and before him S. Epiphanius (Hæres. 78); although Baronius thinks that Christ returned from Egypt in the ninth year of His age.

[2] They are dead, &c. They, viz., Herod and his sons Aristobulus, Alexander, and Antipater, who, it would appear, entered into a conspiracy with the Scribes and Pharisees against their father, and by consequence against Messiah, and were by Herod put to death.

[21] Qui consurgens, accepit puerum, et matrem ejus, et venit in terram Israel.
Who arose, and took the child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.

Returning from Egypt. J-J Tissot

[22] Audiens autem quod Archelaus regnaret in Judaea pro Herode patre suo, timuit illo ire : et admonitus in somnis, secessit in partes Galilaeae.
But hearing that Archelaus reigned in Judea in the room of Herod his father, he was afraid to go thither: and being warned in sleep retired into the quarters of Galilee.

[23] Et veniens habitavit in civitate quae vocatur Nazareth : ut adimpleretur quod dictum est per prophetas : Quoniam Nazaraeus vocabitur.
And coming he dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was said by prophets: That he shall be called a Nazarene.

When he arose, he took the young child, &c. Observe, Archelaus reigned as tetrarch, not as king. The angel had said to Joseph, Go into the land of Israel. Joseph understood Judæa, because that was the most important part of the land of Israel, and therein was the temple.


Thither, therefore, he thought of going to render God thanks for his happy return, especially because, by God’s command, all the Hebrew males were commanded to go up to the temple thrice a year. Whence St. Augustine (lib. 2 de Consensu. Evang. c. 9): “The angel does not express into what part, that he may return to him again, when he is in doubt; but because he had not told him expressly, Joseph understood Judæa, the more worthy part of the kingdom: for he thought that with such a boy he might only dwell at Jerusalem. But the angel meant Galilee.”

Moreover, Joseph turned aside into Galilee, although he knew that Herod Antipas, the brother of Archelaus, ruled there. He did so, both because Archelaus was more ambitious and cruel than Antipas, as because the infant slaughter of Herod of Ascalon, the father of Archelaus and Antipas, had taken place in Judæa, namely, in Bethlehem. Wherefore Archelaus would remember it, and would easily perceive that when Christ came back to Judæa He had escaped the slaughter, and would therefore again seek to put Him to death.

Fully to enter into this history ab ovo, as they say, consult Josephus, Ant. lib. 10, c. 10, et seq. When Herod died, in the thirty-seventh year of his reign, two of his surviving sons—Archelaus, and Herod Antipas, who clothed Christ in His Passion with a white robe, to mock Him—contended together for the possession of his kingdom. Augustus entrusted the settlement of the dispute to Caius Cæsar, his grandson by his daughter Julia, who decided as follows—that neither disputant should succeed to the kingdom, but that it should be divided into four tetrarchies, whose rulers should be tetrarchs, not kings. In pursuance of this he assigned Judæa to Archelaus, Galilee to Antipas, Trachonitis to their third brother, Philip, Abilene to Lysanias. This is clear from Luke 3:1. When, therefore, S. Matthew says, Archelaus reigned, you must not understand that he was a king, or had the title of a king, but of a tetrarch, or toparch, but yet with the hope of the kingdom and the kingly name, if he conducted himself well, according to the promise of Augustus Cæsar.

After Archelaus had reigned as tetrarch for nine years, he was sent into exile for his bad government, thirty-seven years after the battle of Actium, and seven before the death of Augustus. So Josephus, Eusebius, Scaliger, &c.

After Archelaus was exiled, Augustus appointed governors of Judæa, who ruled it in his name. There were three of those who presided over Judæa during the seven years which elapsed before the death of Augustus. The first was Coponius, who, together with Quirinus, prefect of Syria, confiscated the riches of Archelaus; the second was M. Ambinius; the third was Annius Rufus.


From these facts much light is thrown upon the narratives of SS. Matthew and Luke. And, in the first place, it is clear why Matthew says that Joseph turned aside into Galilee from fear of Archelaus, reigning in Judæa. It was lest he, following in the steps of his father Herod, should seek to slay Christ, as the King of the Jews. In the second place, we see why Christ only went up to the temple in Judæa when He was twelve years old: Archelaus had been then deprived of the tetrarchy, and driven into exile. In Archelaus the race of Herod ceased to rule in Judæa, and were succeeded by Roman governors, from whom Christ had nothing to fear, for they knew Him not, and had not heard even His name.

Saint Luke - Chapter 2

Jesus and His Mother. J-J Tissot

[39] Et ut perfecerunt omnia secundum legem Domini, reversi sunt in Galilaeam in civitatem suam Nazareth.
And after they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their city Nazareth.

[40] Puer autem crescebat, et confortabatur plenus sapientia : et gratia Dei erat in illo.
And the child grew, and waxed strong, full of wisdom; and the grace of God was in him.

''In our picture, the Holy Child wears the garment without seam, made by a kind of woven linen of a purplish brown colour. The legend about this garment is well known. It tells how Mary wove it herself for her son and that it grew with His growth, so that it lasted Him until the time of His passion and death. Over the seamless garment Jesus wears what was called a 'gibbeh', a loose robe open at the neck kept in place by a sash which He wore as a Jew of Pure descent, for it was part of the Rabbinicdal law that the upper or nobler part of the human body should be thus separated from the lower.''


[Taken from The Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by J. James Tissot, Sampson, Low, Marston, London, 1897]

Totus tuus ego sum 

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum tutus semper sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam