When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli, the son of... - Luke 3:23 (NASB)

There seems to be a widely held view among conservative theologians that Luke's record is actually tracing Mary's genealogy and not Joseph's. Why is that? Luke explicitly states that the lineage is through Joseph with no mention of Mary at all anywhere near the genealogy. I cannot see how Luke's original audience (who would not have had Matthew's genealogy to compare with Luke's) would have read the text and understood it to be Mary's family tree.

I understand that there are inconsistencies between the genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 but it seems like rather poor exegesis to say that Luke is giving Mary's family tree when her name is conspicuously absent from the text and Joseph's name is explicitly mentioned.

Furthermore, Luke seems to stress elsewhere in his gospel that Joseph is the one who is descended from David:

... a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the descendants of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. - Luke 1:27

Luke mentions Mary but, unlike with Joseph, he does not include Mary as a descendant of David. Also...

Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child. - Luke 2:4,5

Again Luke stresses Joseph's Davidic line but, while mentioning Mary, he says nothing about her being a descendant of David. In fact, nowhere in his gospel does Luke give any indication that Mary is of the Davidic line.

Since it is such a widely held view that Luke is describing Mary's family tree there must be strong evidence to support it but I have not been able to find it through my own research. Can someone help me see what I am missing?

When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli, the son of... - Luke 3:23 (NASB)

There seems to be a widely held view among conservative theologians that Luke's record is actually tracing Mary's genealogy and not Joseph's. Why is that? Luke explicitly states that the lineage is through Joseph with no mention of Mary at all anywhere near the genealogy. I cannot see how Luke's original audience (who would not have had Matthew's genealogy to compare with Luke's) would have read the text and understood it to be Mary's family tree.

I understand that there are inconsistencies between the genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 but it seems like rather poor exegesis to say that Luke is giving Mary's family tree when her name is conspicuously absent from the text and Joseph's name is explicitly mentioned.

Furthermore, Luke seems to stress elsewhere in his gospel that Joseph is the one who is descended from David:

... a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the descendants of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. - Luke 1:27

Luke mentions Mary but (unlike with Joseph) he does not include her as a descendant of David. Also...

Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child. - Luke 2:4,5

Again Luke stresses Joseph's Davidic line but, while mentioning Mary, he says nothing about her being a descendant of David. In fact, nowhere in his gospel does Luke give any indication that Mary is of the Davidic line.

Since it is such a widely held view (that Luke is describing Mary's family tree) there must be strong evidence to support it but I have not been able to find it through my own research. Can someone help me see what I am missing?