Reconstructing the Tomb of Christ

The correct site and reconstruction of the original structure of the tomb of Christ have been a controversial subject that has tantalized scholars since the late 1800s. The substructures of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem were viewed for the last time in 1808 following a disastrous fire. According to the report at that time, the only living rock that could still be seen was part of a bench, the outline of the tomb itself having disintegrated long before.

The most notable contribution toward reconstructing the tomb was the 1914 work of Father Hugues Vincent, a French Dominican of the Ecole Biblique Frangaise in Jerusalem. Even though other possible locations and reconstructions exist, Vincent's work is still considered authoritative and has met no major opposition. ¹ Unfortunately, he had to rely heavily on images produced from literary sources in his proposed reconstruction, since a sound, closely dated typology of tomb architecture was not available in his day (see figure 1).

Today it is possible to create that typology. Improved excavation techniques, refined dating methods, and the increased availability of detailed archeological reports provide the necessary information. Based on the changes of ceramic pottery styles in successive strata, pottery typology forms the most important of the criteria for dating all excavated materials. Thus it is the contents of a tomb that allows the archeologist to date it. From earliest times in Palestine objects from this life have been buried with the dead, purportedly to sustain them in a future existence. Also, Palestinian tombs were typically caves or rock-cut structures used by families for generations. This extended use and the accumulation of objects from successive burials make the dating of a tomb a difficult task. The earliest objects are used to date the tomb's initial construction; the latest objects provide a date for the final interment and for architectural alterations.

The critical step in solving the problem of the reconstruction of Christ's tomb is finding other tombs that match the same general description as given in the Gospels. By a careful comparison of that description with tombs dated by artifacts and with those that exhibit similar structural characteristics with or without the rolling-stone method of closure, a general form can be found that will define the limits of the time period under study.

Sixty-one rolling-stone tombs can be documented from the Early Roman through the Byzantine periods (63 B.C.-A.D. 640). 2 Of these, two distinctive architectural forms exist: the kokhim (or loculus) and the arcosolia. The first, a form in use until A.D. 70-135,3 has the entryway carved at ground level into the face of the stone outcropping. Sometimes an elaborate court is also carved. Radiating from a central chamber are the kokhim, or horizontal burial niches, each large enough to contain a single body (approximately 2 feet wide, 3 feet high, and 6 feet long [see figure 2]). The central chamber was the first area to be cut in the tomb, and also the first to be used for burials. Depending on family circumstances, this chamber sometimes was left with only the beginnings of kokhim carved into the walls, hinting of its final intended form. The size of the chamber was dependent on the number of planned burial niches, and was always high enough to enable the burial party to stand upright. A pit in the center of the chamber formed, around its sides, a bench or ledge that lined three or four walls. The top of the bench was level with the kokhim, and was wide enough to hold a body for washing and anointing. The bench was also used to hold ossuaries and other burial furnishings.

The ossuary is a most characteristic and highly functional object found exclusively in Jewish tombs. It is a small limestone box with a lid and is used as a container for the reburial of an individual's bones. Many times these boxes carry inscriptions relating the person's origin, name, occupation, and circumstances of death. One scholar suggests that the cross marks found on certain ossuaries may indicate that the person died of crucifixion. One even bears the inscription of grief: "Jesus woe!" ⁴

Because of the need for continual reuse of the tomb's kokhim, the closure was never meant to be permanent. The doors were always of cut stone, and for chambered tombs, one of three varieties: a square slab, a rolling stone, or a swinging door that could be locked. The entrance was quite small, approximately two by three feet, allowing access by only one person at a time.

The second tomb type, the arcosolia, was popular during the Byzantine period and was the last to use the rolling-stone closure. Its outstanding characteristic is the arched vault, or arcosolium, found over the benches or troughlike graves lining three walls of the square chamber. It is this form that has most often brought confusion in the reconstruction of Christ's tomb. The arcosolium, however, was not used in the first century.

The final step in a proposed reconstruction is to analyze the sources that describe the sepulcher of Jesus or the events connected with it. From the accounts given in the Gospels, we may draw a number of conclusions: 1. The tomb was new, possibly unfinished, and certainly unused prior to Jesus' burial (see Matt. 27:59, 60; Luke 23:53; John 19:41). 2. The tomb utilized the rolling-stone method of closure. The women were concerned about how to open the tomb, indicating that the stone may have been of considerable size and possibly employed a slanting track, since one person can normally roll the stone door in a level track 5 (see Matt. 27:60; 28:2; Mark 15:46; 16:3, 4). 3. It was necessary to stoop at the entrance in order to look inside (see Luke 24:12; John 20:5, 11, 12). 4. The place where Christ's body lay was visible from the tomb door. The burial site was on the right side and was of such construction that two people could comfort ably sit,' 'one at the head, and the other at the feet" (verse 12; see also Matt. 28:6; Mark 16:5).

At the end of the Bar Cocheba Revolt in A . D . 135, the forces of Emperor Hadrian not only drove the Jews from Jerusalem but also did considerable damage at the site of the sepulcher. Debris covered the tomb, and a temple dedicated to Venus was built on the site.

In the excavations at Dura-Europus, the earliest-known representation of Christ's tomb was discovered in a baptistry dating between A.D. 232/233 and 256.6 This portrayal of the tomb depicts it as a sarcophagus with the lid closed. A star appears on each side, and women, in procession, carry the necessary materials to prepare Christ's body for burial. Perhaps the difference between this fresco and the New Testament account can be explained by the fact that at least a century had elapsed between Hadrian's attack, which hid the tomb from view, and the construction of the baptistry.

The rise of the "Christian" emperor Constantine in 325 was marked by the recovery and restoration of Christian holy places in Jerusalem. According to the church historian Eusebius, who wrote about 337, the most notable of these discoveries was that of Christ's tomb. Since it had been described as a rolling-stone tomb, it should not have been difficult to distinguish it from others that were uncovered in the same cemetery by the removal of the temple of Venus. Even if the stone had been removed, the track would have been recognizable. Eusebius reports that Constantine's architects cut the tomb away from the hillside and decorated it, which accounts for the first alteration of the tomb's appearance. Further deterioration came later with destructive acts, first by the Persians in 614 and then in 1009 by al-Hakim, caliph of Egypt, an act that ultimately led to the Crusades.

Although most scholars no longer question the traditional site for the Holy Sepulcher, it had been a burning issue before the excavations of Kathleen Kenyon and Ute Lux. The Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement was the battlefield on which the leading opponents, Conrad Schick, Claude Conder, Charles Wilson, Charles Warren, and Charles Gordon fought the issue from 1870 to 1912. Minor characters aligned themselves with one side or the other. Few dared to contradict both.

The main point of all the arguments was that the traditional site lay inside the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem, while the New Testament account places the site of execution and entombment outside the city. Pro posed sites were numerous: the Garden (Gordon's) tomb; Conder's tomb, Gethsemane; the Tomb of the Kings (actually the Tomb of Queen Helena of Adiabene); and the Dome of the Rock.

By the 1960s, Kathleen Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem, and later those by Ute Lux, not only identified the course of the Second Wall (dating to Christ's time) but undeniably proved that the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher had indeed been outside the walls then. The walls of the Old City as they were viewed in the late 1800s were medieval in date. But even aside from the excavations, the evidence was in favor of the traditional site. That site was known to have been built over an ancient Jewish cemetery containing a tomb now referred to as the Tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. Perhaps this tradition could have been proof enough that the tomb of Christ had been located in the right place.

The reconstruction proposed by Hugues Vincent is a chamber containing a single bench under an arcosolium (see figure 1). According to the tomb typology currently in use, the arcosolia style belongs to a period long after the time of Christ. However, Vincent can hardly be blamed for not knowing this. About thirty-nine rolling-stone tombs had been published before his work in 1914, thirty-one of which are of the arcosolia type. The remaining eight have kokhim and were published in material apparently not available to him. Although not a true arcosolia type, a rolling-stone tomb exists in the cloister of the Ecole Biblique Frangaise, where he lived in Jerusalem. It was most influential in his work. Stewart Macalister, excavator of Gezer around 1912, where eight rolling-stone tombs of the arcosolia type were found, noted that a group of Dominicans from the school visited his excavations. If Vincent was not among them, he was probably made aware of these tombs by others.

Since the style of the tomb that was common to the Early Roman period is that of the kokhim type, a first choice for the reconstruction of Christ's sepulcher would be a kokhim tomb in the initial stage of construction, that is, consisting of only the chamber with pit (see figure 3). The New Testament says that the tomb was new and had not yet been used. It is known that such tombs were commonly used for burials even when still unfinished. Christ's body would have been placed on the bench on the right side, to await final preparation. All sources agree that the only remaining portion of original stone in the Holy Sepulcher is a bench on the right side (see figure 4).

An alternative reconstruction would allow for the addition of kokhim (see figure 5). The New Testament states that the women returned after the Sabbath to finish the preparation of Christ's body (Mark 16:1). If only the bench was present, and the body was not to be moved into a kokh, then under the Mishnah (Shabbath 23:5) the body could have been prepared on the Sabbath so long as it was not actually moved. If, however, it was intended that the body be placed in a kokh, then it would have been necessary to leave it on the bench through the Sabbath. Moving the body into a kokh before Sabbath would require its removal for preparation, then replacement. Since there is good evidence that the body was left on the bench, those who stooped down at the entrance could have seen it. The use of the bench also makes adequate allowance for the two angels to sit at the head and feet were Christ had lain, and for a place where the linen sheet and napkin could be in full view.

The most common form of rolling-stone closure was a recess at the side of the entrance. Since the New Testament says that the women were concerned about who would roll the stone away for them (verse 3), it may be assumed that the track was slanted. With a slanted track, the rolling stone would close automatically if left unattended, and would require considerably more effort to open (see figure 6). If one averaged all the rolling stones still in existence, the size of the stone in the reconstruction would be approximately 4K feet in diameter and 2 ^1/2 feet thick.

We may conjecture as to what might have been left in the tomb had the women prepared Christ's body: lamps to light the sepulcher, ceramic vessels for water to wash the body, glass vessels for the ointment to anoint Him, and the linen sheeting to wrap Him. Had Christ never risen, there might have been an ossuary, similar to others discovered, with a small cross marking His crucifixion and the phrase of lamentation, "Jesus woe!"