The ‘James Ossuary’, originally hailed as a remarkable find last year, is now being widely reported as a forgery.
The inscription on an ancient burial box, which appeared to offer the best non-biblical archaeological proof of the existence of Jesus Christ, is a fake, according to a team of Israeli experts.
The ‘James Ossuary’, originally deemed genuine in October last year, contains an inscription that reads ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’. It appeared that the reference pointed to James, a leader of the early church in Jerusalem, stoned to death in 62AD, and the brother of Christ.
“The ossuary is real. But the inscription is a fake,” said Shuka Dorfman, director of the Israeli Antiquities Authority (IAA). “What this means is that someone took the real box and forged the writing on it, probably to give it a religious significance.”
The report found that the inscription had been carved over the stone’s natural fossilised sheen, indicating it had been added at a later date. The actual box, which is universally believed to be genuine, has been dated to 63AD.
The IAA was asked to examine the artefact, check previous scientific conclusions and report with their own evaluation. Officials say they reached their conclusions after extensive exams by several teams of experts.
Dr Karin Sowada, assistant curator of the Nicholson Museum at Sydney University and a member of Sydney Standing Committee, said her initial reaction had been that the inscription was ‘too good to be true’.
“It is not surprising that the Ossuary has been declared a forgery by the IAA,” said Dr Sowada. “Its very authenticity was always in doubt owing to the questionable provenance of the artefact.”
But while the inscription has been ‘officially’ described as a fake, other experts believe the debate is not closed.
Dr Paul Barnett, an historian specialising in the New Testament era, thinks the jury is still out.
“It’s true that the words ‘the brother of Jesus’ are in a different script from ‘James, son of Joseph’. My understanding is that both scripts come from the same era. The options are that the ‘Jesus’ words had been added by a family member or they were an ancient forgery. But what would a forger of the era hope to gain from scratching these words on a burial box? Today people might question whether Jesus ever lived, but that was hardly an issue in 62 AD. Who would have had the foresight then to anticipate this being an issue today? A forger would probably have added the words ‘brother of the Lord’, not’ brother of Jesus’.
“I think we have to wait for more tests and analysis before we decide the matter. At the moment the experts are divided.”
Dr Barnett said that there were already several artefacts that are not doubted, which cast light on the Gospels and confirm the existence of Pontius Pilate and High Priest Caiaphas. “These tell us that the New Testament is a historical record whose historicity is confirmed by this kind of external information.” But he added that for Christians, their confidence does not depend on archaeological evidence. “For me, as for other believers, faith arises out of the written text of the Bible,” he said.
Dr Sowada agreed that believers should not be disturbed by the latest findings, saying that the Christian faith ‘rests on much more than objects we can see and touch’. “The New Testament documents them-selves are ample historical evidence of the life and times of Jesus and the early church. Moreover, there are a number of existing, reliable non-biblical sources which lend support to the historicity of the biblical narrative,” Dr Sowada said.
“New artefacts relevant to the Bible will continue to be discovered, and they must be held up to the most rigorous scientific and scholarly scrutiny. The James ossuary failed that test.”
