Talpiot Tomb: The True Tomb of Jesus Christ?

For centuries, the greatest theological debate has stemmed from the potential existence of one man: Jesus Christ. His existence has sparked both individual curiosity and academic analysis, on an international and interreligious level. Perhaps the greatest discovery relating to the life of Jesus Christ happened in 1980, when a salvage excavation in Jerusalem disturbed a tomb of ten ossuaries (Rollston, 2006). It was only after the inscriptions on six of the ossuaries were revealed that the tomb was referred to as the “Jesus tomb” or the “Talpiot Tomb”, when the connection to Jesus was apparent (Rollston, 2006). An archaeological discovery like this had extreme ramifications for both the religious and non-religious worlds: because of the scope of the Talpiot Tomb's global importance, the haste began to establish, once and for all, the true history of Jesus Christ.

Dr. Shimon Gibson, a renown archaeologist and professor, describes approaching the exposed tomb in 1980:

“It was hewn from gleaming white limestone and there were chisel marks cut diagonally across the entrance that were set off by the orange staining derived from the soil fills removed by bulldozers. Above the doorway were two simple raised carvings of a circle and a pointed triangle”(Gibson 2006).

Continuing in his article “Is the Talpiot Tomb Really the Family Tomb of Jesus”, Gibson describes how the entrance to the tomb had no blocking stone, causing half a metre of soil to settle in the inner chamber. Because the tomb was unsealed, this allows for the possibility that the tomb had been previously entered. Even after the tomb had been discovered, there were reports of local children playing with the discovered bones; some even witnessed the children playing soccer with a skull (Gibson, 2006). This probability of easy grave theft greatly questions the assumption that the tomb could have remained untouched for close to 2000 years, and still serve as evidence of the life of Jesus and his family. In an archaeological context, the Talpiot Tomb was discovered at quite a late point in history, meaning the tomb was unprotected and unstudied for an incredibly long period of time.

Dr James Tabor, one of the few to study the tomb in 1980 after its original discovery, continues to write on the tomb found in Jerusalem decades after its initial discovery. The first controversy surrounding the Talpiot Tomb started in 1996, with the BBC documentary “The Body in Question” (Tabor, 2007), when it was revealed to the public the six ossuaries were inscribed with “Jesus son of Joseph, two Marys, a Joseph, a Matthew, and a Jude son of Jesus” (Tabor, 2007). However, many have contested whether these are accurate translations, or if the inscriptions are authentic themselves. Indisputably, in 1980 when the tomb was opened, there were ten ossuaries within, six of which bore inscriptions (Tabor, 2007). It is now 34 years since the tomb was discovered, and there has not been a conclusion regarding the authenticity of the ossuaries that can be decided upon.

Excitement and debate rose again in when another significant ossuary entered the public spotlight, owned by Oden Galden: “A First Century CE ossuary belonging to a private collector, bearing engraved Aramaic inscription 'Ya'akov bar Yosef achui de Yeshua' (James son of Joseph his brother of Jesus), has been attributed to James, Jesus' brother, first head of the Jerusalem church”(Ayalon et al., 2004). Scientists leapt at the opportunity to date the ossuary, and as published in the Archaeological Journal of Science, the analysis was completed with the final conclusion: “The patina was most likely artificially formed from powdered chalk immersed in hot water” (Ayalon et al., 2004), patina referring to the tarnish formed on surfaces by oxidation (Oxford Reference Dictionary). Many different conclusions have been drawn, but for the most part specialists will agree that the ossuary holds no absolutely definitive evidence.

Opponents to the verifiability of the Tomb's authenticity have argued further evidence, that “one should note that of the six inscribed ossuaries, there are just two personal names with patronymics ... [but] no matronymics” (Rollston, 2006). I can understand that burials occurring at different times could have resulted in different burial practices, so this argument does not fully convince me of forgery. However, it seems each piece of evidence found to support the existence of the family of Jesus has a countering piece of evidence, and vice versa. Because of this, I believe the debate of Jesus Christ's existence will continue on both sides, regardless of artifacts discovered in the future. I therefore do not draw any personal conclusions about the true nature of the Talpiot Tomb, but recognize its significance in Christian history will always be undeniable.