Frankincense was a luxury import, the rosin of a tree which grew in Arabia, India, and Somalia. Myrrh, similarly, was the rosin of a tree which grew in Arabia and Ethiopia. These rosins had a wide range of uses from ritual use in cultic practice and in magic, to use at wedding ceremonies and for cosmetic purposes, to consumption as spices or medicinally. In OT use we find various pairs from Matthew’s gold, frankincense, and myrrh, but never the three together. No particular symbolism should be attributed to the individual items making up the present from the Magi: as expensive luxury items the gifts befit the dignity of the role for which this child is born.145 An allusion to Is. 60:6 is possible: Israel being glorified in the person of the messiah by the wealth of the nations.
John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text (New International Greek Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2005), 117.
The magi open their treasure chests and offer the child their gifts. The formulation is reminiscent of Isa 60:6* and in a secondary sense of Cant 3:6*.103 Isaiah 60 speaks of the eschatological pilgrimage of the Gentiles and their kings to Zion. Does Matthew see in the homage of the magi a symbolic fulfillment of this well-known prediction? That is not certain, since the OT reminiscence is by no means unambiguous and no reference is made to the context of Isa 60:6*. What the gifts themselves mean is not certain. Frankincense, the resin of the (frank)incense trees that grow in southeast Arabia,105 India, and Somalia, and myrrh, the resin of the myrrh trees that also grow in Arabia and Ethiopia, were used primarily in the cult but also for magical practices, at wedding ceremonies, for cosmetic purposes, and as seasoning or medication. Both were regarded as very expensive (imported) luxury items. Along with gold, the most likely meaning is that the magi bring the child the most costly gifts possible.
Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1–7: A Commentary on Matthew 1–7 (ed. Helmut Koester; Rev. ed.; Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), 114–115.
καὶ ἀνοίξαντες τοὺς θησαυροὺς αὐτῶν. For ἀνοίγω (Mt: 11; Mk: l; Lk: 7) with ‘treasure’ in the LXX see Deut 28:12; Jer 27:25; Amos 8:5. θησαυρός (Mt: 9; Mk: 1; Lk: 4) means ‘receptacle for treasure’, ‘treasure-chest’ (cf. Job 38:22; Prov 8:21; 1 En 97:9; Josephus, Ant. 9:163). As the magi seem to know, earthly treasure is to be given up or given to God (2:11; 6:19). Only heavenly treasure matters (6:20–1; 19:21).
προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ δῶρα. Both προσφέρω (Mt: 15; Mk: 3; Lk: 4) and δῶρον (Mt: 9; Mk: 1; Lk: 2) are Matthean favourites. Their combination (never in Mark or Luke) occurs also in 5:23–4; 8:4; Heb 5:1; 8:3; 9:9. The three gifts are a symbol of loyalty and submission; but the magi are not—as the church Fathers taught (see on 2:1)—giving up the tools of their trade.
χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον καὶ σμύρναν. λίβανος occurs only one other time in the NT, in Rev 18:13. σμύρνα also occurs only one other time, in Jn 19:39. χρυσός appears four times in Matthew, never in Mark or Luke.
λίβανος, a Semitic loan word (lěbōnâ, lěbônâ), means either the ‘frankincense tree’ (as in T. Job 32:11) or (as here) ‘frankincense’, an odoriferous gum resin from various trees and bushes which had a cultic usage in the ancient world. According to Exod 30:34–8, frankincense was a prescribed ingredient of sacred incense. According to Lev 24:7, it was to be offered with the bread of the Presence (cf. Josephus, Ant. 3:143; Jub. 50:10). According to Lev 2:1–2, 14–16; 6:14–18, it was added to cereal offerings (cf. Neh 13:5, 9). In b. Sanh. 43a it is said to be an anodyne (cf. Celsus 5:18:6). Whether frankincense was cultivated in Palestine is debated and doubtful; that it was imported from Arabia is certain (cf. Isa 60:6; Jer 6:20; Herodotus 3:107).
σμύρνα = μύρρα (latin murra), another Semitic loan word (mōr, môr), is ‘myrrh’, a fragrant gum resin from the ‘balsamodendron myrrh’ or ‘commiphora kataf’, trees particularly abundant in south Arabia and north Ethiopia (cf. Herodotus 3:107). It had a variety of uses, being an element in perfumes (Esth 2:12; Ps 45:8; Ct 1:13; LAB 12:9), a component of holy anointing oil (Exod 30:23), and an ingredient in incense (Ct 3:6). It also served as a burial spice (Jn 19:39; cf. Herodotus 2:40, 86) and, like frankincense, as an anodyne (Mk 15:23). For frankincense with myrrh see Ct Ct 3:6; 4:6, 14; Ecclus 24:15; 1 En 29:2; 1 Clem. 25:2; Herodotus 3:107; Sepher Ha-Razim 1:30, 224; PGM 1:62–3, 73–4, 243–7.
What is signified by the gold, frankincense, and myrrh? The most common interpretation in church history appears early: gold for Jesus as king, frankincense for Jesus as God, myrrh for Jesus as the one to die (cf. Irenaeus, Adv. haer. 3:9:2; Clement of Alexandria, Paed. 2:8:63, 5; Origen, C. Cels. 1:60; Theodotus of Ancyra, Hom. 1:5; Prudentius in PL 69:904–5; Pseudo-Bede in PL 94:541).59 This explanation we cannot endorse. Among other things, by changing Mark’s ‘wine mingled with myrrh’ (15:23) to ‘wine mingled with gall’ (27:34; cf. Ps 68:22 LXX), Matthew has ruined the possible connexion between myrrh and the passion. A better guess as to what the gifts mean is this: the magi’s worship and presentation are the firstfruits of the eschatological pilgrimage of the nations and their submission to the one true God. The OT teaches that the great redemption will see the Gentiles come up to Zion, bringing gifts and offering right worship (see on 8:11–12). Especially interesting in this regard is Ps. Sol. 17:31, according to which the heathen nations will come from the ends of the earth with gifts in hand to see the glory of the Son of David. Note further 1 En 53:1, where Enoch foresees the time when all those dwelling on the earth and sea and islands will bring to the Righteous and Elect One, the Son of Man, gifts and presents and tokens of homage. (For later material see SB 1, p. 84, to which add Gen. Rab. on 49:10: ‘all the nations of the world shall in the future bring a gift to the Son of David’.) Now undoubtedly both Isa 60 and Ps 72 would have been understood by Matthew and his readers in terms of the expected pilgrimage of the nations (cf. Mt 8:11–12)—and these two OT texts, although they are not explicitly cited, are probably alluded to in Mt 2 (cf. Tertullian Adv. Marc. 3:13). Isa 60, a thoroughly eschatological passage which has influenced another early Christian text, Rev 21:23–6, contains these words: ‘Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you’ (60:1). ‘Nations shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising’ (60:3). ‘The wealth of nations shall come to you’ (60:5). ‘They shall bring gold and frankincense and proclaim the praise of the Lord’ (60:6). And in Ps 72, which even a few modern interpreters have taken to be messianic, there is this: ‘May the kings of Tarshish and of the isles render him tribute, may the kings of Sheba and Seba bring gifts’ (72:10); ‘May all kings fall down (LXX: προσκυνήσουσιν) before him, all nations serve him’ (72:11); ‘Long may he live, may gold of Sheba be given to him’ (72:15).
Beyond the eschatological theme, a Jesus/Solomon typology may also perhaps be discerned in Mt 2:11. (1) Gold and myrrh were among the gifts brought to king Solomon by foreigners, and gold and frankincense were firmly associated with the temple he built (1 Kgs 10:2, 25; 1 Chr 9:29; 2 Chr 9:24; Neh 13:5, 9; Ecclus 47:18). (2) Ps 72, alluded to in 2:11, is attributed in the OT to Solomon. Moreover, if we are to trust Justin (Dial. 34), some Jews at least applied the psalm’s words to king Solomon. (3) Leaving aside Ecclus 24:15, frankincense and myrrh appear together only three times in the OT, each time in connexion with Solomon: Ct 3:6; 4:6, 14. (4) The eschatological events (including the eschatological pilgrimage of the nations, foreshadowed or begun in Mt 2) were sometimes conceived as a return to—or a surpassing of—the days of Solomon, the days of the first temple (e.g., Hag 2:7–9 and T. Benj. 9:2). (5) Just as the magi give both gifts and homage to king Jesus, so foreign royalty once rendered both gifts and honour to King Solomon (1 Kgs 10:1–10, 15, 23–5; 2 Chr 9:14; T. Sol.)—and in late Jewish tradition the queen of Sheba saw a star as she made her way to David’s son.63 Further, if Matthew thought the magi’s home to be Arabia—an option reinforced by Herodotus 3:107: ‘Arabia is the only place that produces frankincense and myrrh’—it may be recalled that the most famous visitors Solomon received were also from Arabia (1 Kgs 10:1–5; Mt 12:42; T. Sol. 19:1–3; 21–2). In view of these several points, it is rather tempting to see the Jesus of Mt 2 as one like Solomon, the son of David.
In addition to Isa 60 and Ps 72, could Ps 110:3 also have played some rôle in the formation of Mt 2:1–12, or at least have later been read in terms of the story of the magi? In the LXX we read of a beginning, a birth, a brightness, and of ‘the morning-star’. The Hebrew, certainly corrupt, is virtually unintelligible. If, however, someone understood the verse as does the NEB (‘At birth you were endowed with princely gifts’), and if the application of Ps 110 to Jesus was presupposed (cf. Mt 22:44 par.; Acts 2:34–5; Heb 1:13), it would have been easy to read the psalm’s words as prophesying the events Matthew narrates. Melito, Hom. 82 applies Ps 110:3 to Jesus: ‘He is the first born of God, begotten before the morning star. He made the light shine and the day be radiant …’.
W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison Jr., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew (vol. 1; International Critical Commentary; London; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004), 1:248–251.
To Support this Blog: