The brother of Jesus?

This is part of the reason why there has been so much excitement among scholars over these past few months. This past year they discovered an object which dates back to the time of Jesus. It is an ossuary, a stone box used to store the bones of the dead. What is so extraordinary about this particular ossuary is its inscription: James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus. What does this inscription mean, and does it refer to 'ames, the brother of Jesus' n the New Testament?

How was it found?

The story of this ossuary is a bit clouded. An unidentified man in Israel invited one of his friends to look at some of his ancient manuscripts. Almost as an afterthought, he invited that friend to look at the ossuary. He had bought it from another unidentified person who had probably found it in a tomb. It is illegal for a person to excavate such tombs without informing the authorities so that they can determine its archaeological importance. Yet, this is done all the time in this part of the world.

Because the object was originally obtained illegally, its background is clouded in mystery. Archaeologists often verify the antiquity of a find by studying the various objects found at that site. Even seemingly unimportant objects can help to date a find. But, since scholars do not know the original site of this ossuary, they cannot date it in traditional ways.

Still, it does come from a part of Jerusalem which is known to be honeycombed with ancient tombs. The limestone of the ossuary is the same as that found on the Mount of Olives. Other similar boxes have been found in this area, so it could be real.

What other proof?

There are also other pieces of evidence that would make one think that this is an authentic first-century ossuary and not a fraud. The stone of the box is covered with a layer of mineral deposits called a patina. Scholars have determined that it is an unusual pattern called a 'cauliflower deposit.' This is the pattern that one would expect on a stone box that had been kept underground for centuries. Thus, the theory that this was a box discovered in a plundered tomb seems to be confirmed.

Second, the letters on the cover are consistent with the form of writing used in the first century A.D. The inscription is in Aramaic, and much like our languages today, the writing style changed over the centuries. The cursive form used here was not used for all that long, but it was used in the first century A.D.

Third, this type of box was not used for all that long. Jewish burial custom around the time of Jesus was to put bodies in an outer room of a tomb on a platform until the body would decompose. Then, about a year after the original burial, the family would gather the bones and put them in a container and place that in an inner room of the tomb. In this way, the outer room could be used again. It was only around the time of Jesus, however, that ossuaries were used for the bones.

Fourth, the patina (mineral deposits) on the surface of the stone seems to run into the indentations of the inscription. This is important, for it means that the inscription is as old as the box.

Given all of this, one could conclude that this is an authentic ancient artifact that dates back to the time of Jesus.

But whose ossuary is it?

But was this the ossuary in which James, the brother of Jesus was buried? First of all, there are no bones in the box (at least no large bones). That is not really a problem, however, for the relics of St. James are believed to be contained in an Armenian church in Jerusalem. Furthermore, even if there had been bones, there would be no guarantee that they were the bones of St. James, for it was not unusual to reuse ossuaries. Anyway, it is believed that the relics of the martyr were saved from the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. They would have been removed from the ossuary to carry outside of the city (for the ossuary would have been too heavy for a refugee to carry). So we would not expect the ossuary to contain the bones of St. James.

Were St. James’ bones ever in the box? This is where we must be careful and examine the evidence.

James was a common name at the time of Jesus, as were the names Joseph and Jesus. Thus, these names do not prove anything. Yet, Jerusalem was not all that large of a city. It is estimated that in this period (a two generation span) there were 80,000 men in the city. Scholars have estimated the percentages of the population that one would expect to have these names. They then determined how many families would have this particular combination of names. The best guess is that there would have been only about twenty families during this entire period with this particular combination of names.

Now even if there were twenty families, one must then ask how many of them would have been rich enough to afford an ossuary such as the one found, but not so rich that they would have bought a more elaborate ossuary (for the one found seems to belong to a middle class family). That lowers the number considerably.

Then, there is the most important peculiarity of the ossuary. It was common to write the deceased person’s name as 'so and so, the son of so and so.' It was fairly uncommon to mention that the deceased was, 'the brother of so and so.' There are a few examples of this type of citation, but they are rare. This reference would probably only be made if the brother were famous or rich. Given the 'middle class' nature of this ossuary, the former is probably the case, that the Jesus mentioned in the inscription was famous.

So what is being said? It seems as if this ossuary is authentic, ancient, and belonged to a James whose brother Jesus was famous. Having said all of this, we cannot prove with 100% certainty that this was the ossuary of the James mentioned in the New Testament, but it is at least probable.

The brother of Jesus

Who was this James? We Catholics believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary had only one child, Jesus. This is a very ancient and venerable tradition. There is nothing in the New Testament that can prove that it is true, but likewise there is nothing that can disprove it.

Yet, the New Testament does mention brothers and sisters of Jesus. They could easily have been relatives of Jesus. Semitic languages speak of even distant relatives as 'brothers and sisters.' This is the solution that the Church in the West has traditionally believed.

The Church in the East has suggested another possibility. Maybe St. Joseph was a widower who had children with his first wife. This would explain why James could be called the son of Joseph. This would be Joseph, the foster father of Jesus.

Having said all of this, one can be sure that there will be much more study concerning this particular artifact. Still, it is fascinating that even today objects can be found that date back to the days of Jesus. It reminds us that our faith is not based upon a myth. Our faith is based upon things that really happened in a particular place and a particular time. Jesus, the eternal Word, entered into our history and participated in our lives. As the First Letter of John states, we saw and heard and even touched him. If this artifact does nothing else than remind of us this, it has already been a tremendous gift.