[MarkBsnr]

Point well taken, Mark. However, the right to the throne could not be passed on to the descendants of concubines. Only the legitimate decadent can claim the throne, and be the anointed one [i.e. the Heb. mashiyah, Eng. messiah, Gr. christos]. And the messiah is the warrior-king in Judaism, of Davidic line of inheritance, a royalty by direct descent and entitlement to the title of king.

Generally speaking; there are some exceptions both here and in European royal lines - once the legitimate heirs are either non existent or decline/abdicate, or are adopted to legitimacy.

Remember, Matthew writes to the Jews and is pursuing a mumbo-jumbo Joseph's pedigree, as if Joseph was the father, and knowing that patrilinear inheritance is the only one the Jews would even take as worthy of consideration.

Normally correct; however in many cases adoptive fathers legitimize their adopted sons.

Luke, on the other hand, writing to the Greeks ignorant of the Jewish customs, is grasping at the straws to establish legitimacy via Mary's genealogy, but all he really mnages to establish is Jesus' Jewishness, and not his legitimate royal inheritance.

This is correct.

[kosta50]

Generally speaking; there are some exceptions both here and in European royal lines - once the legitimate heirs are either non existent or decline/abdicate, or are adopted to legitimacy.

Maybe this will help.

Normally correct; however in many cases adoptive fathers legitimize their adopted sons.

Not in this case. As I said earlier, Joseph's lineage was not acceptable; it was cursed. Consider the Jewish sources. They are down to earth.