It is important that we put away the tinsel and the lights, and for the Little Drummer Boy to put away his drum, so that we may see the story of the birth of Jesus Christ with as much historical accuracy as possible.

Now is the time for a cringe-confession. I was once the Little Drummer Boy.

If old family photos are anything to go by, I was a cute kid. The pastor’s wife was putting together a little Christmas pageant and had written a script focussing on the legendary little drummer boy, who had nothing to offer the Christ-child but his drum. So, (being about nine years old) I was got dressed up in a shepherd’s costume, and the props lady found an old drum from somewhere, and at the climax of the play yours truly marched up the aisle solemnly tapping on my drum. Not a dry eye in the house… and a star was born!

I recount the anecdote because the Little Drummer Boy is a prime example of the legends and myths that have accumulated around the Christmas story. Christmas is well symbolized by the Christmas tree. If the bare conifer is the simple story told by St Matthew and St Luke, the tree smothered in lights, baubles, sweets and sheltering a mound of gaudily wrapped gifts is the symbol of twenty-first century Christmas.

Who can resist the basic story? It has all the heartwarming elements of a Hallmark movie: a starry night, magical wizards from an exotic land, a long journey, pitiful homeless folk, simple peasants, cuddly lambs and dozy donkeys, a gentle ox and a surly camel and most of all, a mother and her newborn baby. The charming tale is just the sort to enter into the realm of folklore, and as it is ecclesiastical folklore it carries extra cultural weight.

Because of its charming human elements, the infancy narratives have also attracted the decoration or extra elaboration I likened to the decorated Christmas tree. These accretions accumulated in four different ways.

First were the actual traditions themselves. Matthew and Luke recorded the events of Jesus’ birth at least fifty years after they took place in Bethlehem. I believe the stories they heard were essentially historically accurate, but the process of oral tradition may have added or omitted details.

A good example of this is the detail that we all accept as part of the story: that the Virgin rode a donkey from Nazareth to Bethlehem. In fact this detail is missing from the Gospel accounts. It entered the story from the early-second-century, non-canonical Gospel of James (aka The Protoevangelium of James). The oral traditions from the Bethlehem and Jerusalem communities would have been reliable—even if flexible in detail.

Interpretation

In addition to the accumulated traditions, the historical story of Jesus’ birth was elaborated by theological interpretation. This interpretation of events began with Matthew and Luke, continued into the writings and preaching of the early Church, and has continued for the last two thousand years. Preachers read their own theology and their own current issues into the stories told by Matthew and Luke.

Interpretation of the events is clear in Matthew and Luke because both evangelists are obviously telling the story to show that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of David, the Son of God, our Savior. Matthew and Luke show how the details of Jesus’ birth fulfill Old Testament prophecies. Their interpretations of the events color the way they tell their stories and help them decide which details to include. So, for example, they tell us about Bethlehem, the city of David, in order to reveal that Jesus is the Son of David.

Later preachers and teachers interpret the story further, and in so doing, they add details to the story. For example, they see in the story of Jesus’ birth a fulfillment of Isaiah 1:3, “The ox knows its master, the donkey its owner’s manger, but Israel does not know, my people do not understand.” Because they connect this verse with Jesus’ birth, the ox and the ass make their entrance into the Christmas story. In fact, as British scholar Margaret Barker has discovered, “The ox and ass do not appear in a nativity text until the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew compiled perhaps in the eighth century.”[1*] Matthew and Luke don’t mention an ox or an ass in the Christmas scene. Later interpretations add that detail.

An example of modern interpretation becoming part of the story is the idea that Mary and Joseph were homeless people. In my new book The Secret of the Bethlehem Shepherds, I explain why this is inaccurate. Nevertheless, it is an easy mistake to make, and because it fits in with our Christian compassion for refugees and the homeless, it has become part of the larger Christmas story.

Legend

Along with the additions of tradition and interpretation, the Christmas story is elaborated by legendary elements. In The Lord of the Rings, Galadriel says, “History became legend, and legend became myth.” Legend is the further speculative elaboration of the historical account over time. An example of legend is the story of King Arthur. Historians believe there was a real British chieftain named Arthur, but the stories told about him soon grew over time and became legends. The legends engendered poems, novels, and even Broadway musicals and Disney films, so more legendary elaborations accumulated. The legends were rooted in real events, but they morphed into fantasy.

Legendary elements also attached themselves to the stories of Jesus’ birth. The legends came about as the stories were retold in different historical and cultural contexts. They then became part of the generally accepted story that was passed down to further generations.

An example of a legendary aspect of the Christmas story is the rustic nativity scene in a rundown cattle shed that gives all of us our much-loved nativity scene. This aspect of the Christmas story comes to us from St. Francis in thirteenth-century Italy.

Wanting to make the Christmas story more relatable to the people of his age, St. Francis set up a Christmas crèche. He naturally assumed that the stable where Jesus was born was similar to the barn-like stable of his day. In fact, the stable in first-century Bethlehem was very different, but the “lowly cattle shed” we all take for granted was a legendary element that was added to the story much later.

More recent examples of the legendary being added to the basic narrative brings us to my debut as the Little Drummer Boy or stories like “the littlest shepherd,” the fourth wise man or the donkey whose baby grew up to be the donkey Jesus rode on Palm Sunday.

Myth

By myth, most people mean a fairy tale: a made-up, untrue story. A better understanding of myth, however, is “a story with multiple levels of meaning.” The story itself could be either pure fiction or the narrative of a historical event. The Gospels are mythical inasmuch as multiple levels of meaning are embedded in historical stories. In addition to the historical level of meaning, there is a moral level, a theological level, and an allegorical level.

Sometimes the theological or moral levels of meaning have prevailed over the historical, and because preachers and teachers wish to emphasize the deeper levels of the story, this process has added more decoration or elaboration to the story.

A good example of this process has to do with the swaddling cloths. Some preachers suggest that the Christ child was wrapped in swaddling cloths and born in a cave because it was a tragic pointer to the fact that one day that Baby would be wrapped in a linen shroud and laid in a cave after His death. This is a nice preaching point, but to add it to the Christmas story is to add a level of meaning and myth.

There is nothing wrong with this per se, but we should be aware that this is an elaboration on the story and not a part of Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts.

The infancy stories have accumulated more elements of tradition, interpretation, legend, and myth than any other parts of the Gospel. Because of this, many scholars have rejected the stories of Jesus’ birth as total fictions—fanciful tales invented by Luke and Matthew to make Jesus more of a supernatural hero.

Most of what they are rejecting are the levels of tradition, interpretation, legend, and myth that have become attached to the basic stories.

While it is understandable to reject these accretions, it is an amazing lapse in scholarly professionalism to conclude that the entirety of the infancy narratives of Luke and Matthew are therefore no more than charming parables or fanciful legends. This was my core reason for researching both the identity of the magi and the historical background of the Bethlehem Shepherds: to put away the tinsel and the lights, and for the Little Drummer Boy to put away his drum, so that we may see the story of the birth of Jesus Christ with as much historical accuracy as possible.

Fr. Longenecker’s most recent book The Secret of the Bethlehem Shepherds  is published by Sophia Institute Press.

The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.

The featured image is “The Drummer Boy” (circa 1862) by William Morris Hunt, and is in the public domain, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

[*] Margaret Barker, Christmas: The Original Story (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2018), 77. Note: The gospel of Pseudo-Matthew is one of many “apocryphal” gospels written much later than the Gospels themselves that elaborate on the Gospel stories and are written by anonymous authors who assumed the names of the apostles to give their writings added authority.

All comments are moderated and must be civil, concise, and constructive to the conversation. Comments that are critical of an essay may be approved, but comments containing ad hominem criticism of the author will not be published. Also, comments containing web links or block quotations are unlikely to be approved. Keep in mind that essays represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Imaginative Conservative or its editor or publisher.