Interesting perspective regarding the Magi, Bobcat.
And that is all it is, a plausible chain of events. The account is terse in its explanations and is apparently written for an audience who will accept the account prima facie.
Any thoughts on how why/how the Magi came to the conclusion that it was a Jewish king and not a king from a different country? Someone gave them accurate info.
This is some commentary on the passage from the NICNT-Matthew commentary (R T France; p. 62):
Secondly, the star which plays such a prominent role in the story invites reflection on Balaam's prophecy in Num 24:17-19 of the rise (LXX anatelei, echoed in Matthew's anatole, vv. 2, 9) of a "star out of Jacob and a scepter out of Israel," which is then interpreted as a ruler who will destroy Israel's enemies and take possession of the lands of Moab and Edom, a prophecy which was understood to point forward to the conquests of King David, and which thus also foreshadows the victory of the "son of David."
"Thirdly, the likely influence of Balaam's prophecy suggests that perhaps Balaam himself, the man who "saw" the messianic star rise (Num 24:15-17), may also be in mind as a model for the magi. He, like them, was a non-Israelite "holy man" and visionary from the East: Num 22:5 locates his home on the Euphrates, while LXX Num 23:7 speaks of his being summoned from Mesopotamia and uses the same phrase ap' anatolon ("from the East") which Matthew uses in Mt 2:1. He, like the magi, was pressurized by a king (Balak) intent on destroying the true people of God, but refused to cooperate and instead took the side of God's people."
Of course, the Balaam comparison can only be pressed so far. . .
On how they came to their interpretation, I would think it would have to be some Jewish influence. How the rising of one particular star could be interpreted so specifically . . . that I don't know. This page offers a plausible scenario.