sotto voce

But Joseph wasn't.

Maklelan

Oh, geez, that was a stupid mistake. I'm sorry.

I already agreed that Joseph was not a priest, though, and pointed out that it really doesn't have anything to do with the point I was making.

Maklelan

FYI, I took a look in some rabbinic literature, and Sifre Num. 18:17 states "there was a place behind the Holy of Holies where the priestly genealogy was examined." This text is tannaitic and comes from a few centuries after the temple was destroyed, but it is known to preserve traditions from well before that.

DCHindley

So also the part that says:

Surely you can produce something, a primary, secondary or even tertiary source, to suggest that any records were known to have been kept by "tribal elders" in "town halls"? Like Hegesippus, the taanaim, even if they were wrong as wrong can be. Anything besides your smug confidence?

DCH

Diogenes the Cynic

The fact that Joseph was not a priest is not especially helpful to an argument that he would have had a documented genealogy, since there was no reason to do so for non-priests.

Diogenes the Cynic

Even synagogues are scarce in the archaeology.

Maklelan

There was plenty of reasons for non-priests to keep track of their genealogy, as aspects of the Law of Moses, including property rights, were tied up in lineage. The problem was that very few non-priestly Jews could find any genealogy by the first century CE. Paul of Tarsus, who was not a priest, claimed to be of the tribe of Benjamin. Whether or not this is true, the placement of his lineage shows its importance for him.

aa5874

If you don't know if Paul's claim were true and if anyone even heard him make the claim then your argument makes very little sense.

Who was Paul of Tarsus? When did he really live?

Paul may have claimed he was from TARSUS simply to deceive the readers.

stephan huller

The Samaritan chronicler Abu'l Fath notes that among the reforms (persecutions) of Commodus imposed upon the Samaritans was the destruction of the priestly genealogical records.

Maklelan

But the fact that he claimed a specific non-priestly lineage, and placed importance on it, shows that it was not unexpected or unusual for non-priests to claim specific genealogies. The evidence simply does not support the notion that there was no reason for a non-priest to keep genealogical records.