The tomb of Nicanor came to light in the early 1970s, during construction work on the Hebrew University's Mount Scopus campus. Today the tomb is located in the university's botanical garden. The burial chambers are located at different levels underground. The tomb had a porch with square piers but no signs of a decorated entablature. An inscription on one of the ossuaries found inside the tomb mentions Nicanor of Alexandria — apparently the same wealthy Jew from Alexandria in Egypt who donated Nicanor's Gate to the Jerusalem temple (see Chapter 7).
Ossuaries
In the middle of Herod's reign, around 20—15 B. C.E., ossuaries first appeared in Jerusalem's rock-cut tombs. Ossuaries were used as containers for bones removed from loculi (after the flesh had decayed), in contrast to sarcophagi (coffins), which accommodated corpses still with the flesh (inhumation). Ossuaries are much smaller than sarcophagi — only big enough to accommodate individual bones gathered together — whereas sarcophagi were designed to contain whole corpses. Most ossuaries from Jerusalem are made of locally quarried stone, usually soft chalk and, rarely, harder limestone. They have flat, rounded, or gabled lids. The ossuaries can be plain or decorated (most decoration consists of incised or chip-carved designs, rarely in relief, and sometimes with painting).
Sometimes the name(s) of the deceased (and infrequently other information, such as the person's title or occupation) were incised on the front, back, side, or lid of the ossuary. Most of the inscriptions are in Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek, and usually they are crudely executed, having been added inside the tomb by family members involved in collecting the remains.
There is no correlation between the relative wealth and status of the deceased and the ornamentation of the ossuary; plain and uninscribed ossuaries have been found in tombs belonging to some of ancient Jerusalem's most prominent families. The same is true of the tombs themselves, as indicated by the modest size and appearance of a tomb belonging to the Caiaphas family. This tomb was discovered in 1990 to the southwest of the Old City, and was excavated by Israeli archaeologists. Two of the ossuaries from the tomb are inscribed with the name Caiaphas (Aramaic “Capha"), including one inscribed “Joseph son of Caiaphas." Because Caiaphas is an unusual name and Joseph son of Caiaphas is known to have served as high priest from 18—36 C. E., this tomb likely belonged to the family of the same high priest who presided over the trial of Jesus (according to the Gospel accounts). Interestingly, some of the largest and most lavishly decorated tombs belonged to emigre families living in Jerusalem, including the tomb of Queen Helena of Adiabene (which, according to Josephus, was crowned by three pyramidal markers) and Nicanor's tomb (which contains more burial chambers than any other Jerusalem tomb). Perhaps these families constructed especially large and lavish tombs to establish their standing among the local elite.
Whereas there is no doubt that ossuaries were used as containers for bones removed from loculi, scholars question why they were introduced into Jerusalem's rock-cut tombs around 20—15 B. C.E. and why they disappeared from Jerusalem after 70 C. E. (with evidence of their use on a smaller and more modest scale in southern Judea and Galilee until the third century). An Israeli archaeologist named Levi Yitzhak Rahmani connects the appearance of ossuaries with the Pharisaic belief in the individual, physical resurrection of the dead. The anticipation of a future, physical resurrection of the dead is accepted today as part of normative, rabbinic Judaism. This doctrine became popular among the Pharisees in the late Second Temple period. However, the Sadducees rejected the belief in individual, physical resurrection of the dead on the grounds that such a doctrine is nowhere explicitly stated in the Pentateuch (Torah). Rahmani suggests that the introduction of ossuaries is connected with the spread of the belief in a future, physical resurrection of the dead. As we have seen, prior to the introduction of ossuaries, the remains of burials in rock-cut tombs were collected in pits, repositories, or charnel rooms. The skeletons therefore were mingled and susceptible to separation, breakage, and even loss. This means that in the event of a physical resurrection, an individual would be restored to life missing vital body parts. According to Rahmani, ossuaries were introduced into
11.7 Inscribed ossuary from the Caiaphas family tomb. Courtesy of Zev Radovan/BibleLand Pictures. com.
Jerusalem's rock-cut tombs to preserve the remains of each individual. Rah-mani also argues that the collection of bones in an ossuary corresponds with the Pharisaic notion that the decay of the flesh is connected with the expiation of sin. In other words, each individual's remains were preserved intact in an ossuary, in a sinless state, awaiting future resurrection.
Many scholars have pointed to difficulties with Rahmani's explanation. For example, ossuaries frequently contain the bones of more than one individual, and sometimes parts of the skeleton are missing. In fact, according to rabbinic law it was not necessary to collect all the bones. Furthermore, even in tombs with ossuaries some skeletons continued to be deposited in pits or repositories. Another difficulty with Rahmani's explanation is that the monumental rock-cut tombs with ossuaries belonged to Jerusalem's elite, many of whom were Sadducees, who reportedly rejected the doctrine of individual, physical resurrection of the dead. In fact, some of these tombs and ossuaries belonged to high priestly families, such as the tomb of Bene Hezir and the tomb and ossuaries of the Caiaphas family. In other words, ossuaries were used by some of the same members of Jerusalem society who reportedly rejected the concept of the resurrection of the dead. It is not a coincidence that outside of Jerusalem, the largest cemetery with rock-cut loculus tombs containing ossuaries is at Jericho, which was the site of the Hasmonean and Herodian winter palaces and the center of a priestly community.
Instead of associating ossuaries with expectations of an afterlife or other religious beliefs, their appearance should be understood within the context of foreign (specifically, Roman) influence on the Jerusalem elite — just as the other features of rock-cut tombs. In the late first century B. C.E. and first century C. E., cremation was the prevailing burial rite among the Romans. The ashes of the deceased were placed in small stone containers called cineraria (cinerary urns), which are usually casket-shaped and have gabled lids. Sometimes they have carved decoration and/or inscriptions. Cinerary urns were in widespread use around the Roman world, including Rhodes, Asia Minor, and North Africa. Small stone containers or chests used for the secondary collection of bones (called ostothecai) are also found in Asia Minor. Like their Judean counterparts, these stone boxes can have carved decoration and sometimes contain the remains of more than one individual. This evidence suggests that the appearance of ossuaries in Judea is related to funerary customs and fashions that were prevalent in the Roman world instead of to Jewish expectations of resurrection.
Rahmani has objected to the possibility that ossuaries were inspired by Roman cinerary urns on the grounds that Jerusalem's elite could not have imitated a practice with which they were unacquainted. However, other Hellenized features in tombs and burial customs were adopted by Jerusalem's elite without personal contact or familiarity (as were other aspects of Hellenistic and Roman culture). Monumental tombs marked by a pyramid became a raging fashion after Simon constructed the family tomb at Modiin. The ultimate source of inspiration for these tombs was the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus, which presumably none of Jerusalem's elite in the Hasmonean period — not even Simon — ever saw. Loculi, which also originated in the Hellenistic world, quickly became universal in Jerusalem's rock-cut tombs. The spread of these features has little or nothing to do with religious beliefs in the afterlife and everything to do with social status. Jerusalem's elite were prohibited by Jewish law from cremating their dead. Instead, they could, and did, adopt the external trappings of cremation by depositing the bones of the deceased in ossuaries (urns). Like loculi, once ossuaries appeared, they quickly became universal in rock-cut tombs.
The disappearance of ossuaries supports the suggestion that they were inspired by Roman cinerary urns. If the use of ossuaries was connected with the concept of the individual, physical resurrection of the dead, they should have become even more popular after 70 C. E., when this belief became normative in Judaism. In fact, the opposite is true. After 70, ossuaries disappeared from Jerusalem because the Jewish elite who used the rock-cut tombs were now dead or dispersed. The appearance of crude ossuaries in Galilee and southern Judea probably is connected with the emigration or displacement of members of Jerusalem's elite to these regions after the First Revolt. By the mid - to late third century, ossuaries ceased to be used.
The production of ossuaries (and other stone vessels) was one component of Jerusalem's economy during the late Second Temple period. It is not a coincidence that ossuaries first appeared during Herod's reign. This period is characterized by a heavy dose of Roman influence on other aspects of the lifestyle of Jerusalem's elite, with a wide range of imported and locally produced consumer goods appearing around 20—10 B. C.E. Their mansions were decorated with Roman-style wall paintings, stucco, and mosaics, and were furnished with locally produced stone tables modeled after Roman prototypes. As in the case of the tombs, these fashions were introduced to Judea by the ruler (in this case, Herod) and were imitated or adopted by the Jerusalem elite.
The heavy dose of Roman cultural influence evident in Jerusalem around 20— 10 B. C.E. should be understood within the context of contemporary events. It was during these years that Herod undertook the reconstruction of the Jerusalem Temple. He established a theater and an amphitheater (or hippodrome) in Jerusalem in which athletic competitions, chariot races, and musical and dramatic contests were held. Herod also maintained close contacts with Augustus. In 22 B. C.E., Herod sent his sons Alexander and Aristobulus (by his Hasmonean wife Mariamne) to Rome to be educated. Alexander and Aristobulus remained in Rome for five years, staying first with Pollio and then with Augustus. A couple of years later (20 B. C.E.), Augustus traveled to Syria, where he was hosted by Herod. In 17 B. C.E., Herod traveled to Rome to visit Augustus, returning to Judea with his sons, who were now young men about nineteen and eighteen years of age. Two years later, Herod entertained Augustus' son-in-law and heir apparent Marcus Agrippa, taking him on a tour of his kingdom. The appearance of ossuaries and other Romanized elements in Jerusalem is a result of the close contacts and interactions between Augustus and his family on the one hand, and Herod and his family on the other. It is not surprising that beginning around 20 B. C.E., the lifestyle — and death style — of Jerusalem's elite was heavily influenced by Roman culture.
Tombs and Burial Customs of the Lower Classes and the Qumran community
We have seen that in the late Second Temple period, the upper classes of Jerusalem and Jericho buried their dead in rock-cut family tombs that were used over the course of several generations. When a family member died, the body was wrapped in a shroud and placed in a loculus. When the loculi became filled, space was made for new burials by clearing out the earlier remains and placing them in a pit or on the floor of the tomb. In the middle of Herod's reign, small bone boxes called ossuaries were introduced into rock-cut tombs as containers for the remains removed from loculi.
This picture is skewed and incomplete because only the more affluent members of Jewish society, who comprised only a small percentage of the population, could afford rock-cut tombs. The association of rock-cut tombs with the upper classes is indicated by several factors. First, rock-cut tombs are concentrated in areas of elite presence, primarily around Jerusalem and Jericho, with scattered examples elsewhere. Second, rock-cut tombs are attested in Jerusalem only in the late First Temple period and late Second Temple period — that is, only when there was an autonomous Jewish elite in the city. The flourishing of the necropolis at Beth Shearim is connected with the displacement and relocation of the Judean elite to Lower Galilee after 70 (see the Sidebar).
The fact that rock-cut tombs accommodated only a small proportion of the population can be demonstrated on the basis of numbers and distribution. Approximately 900 rock-cut tombs of the late first century B. C.E. to the first century C. E. are known from Jerusalem. No more than five to seven people per generation were buried in most of these tombs. If we take the maximum possible estimate (three generations of seven people each buried in all these tombs), the number of burials (over the course of a century) would total 18,900. During this period, Jerusalem's population at any given time was at least 60,000, and sometimes much larger (for example, during the major pilgrimage festivals). Even if we double, triple, or quadruple the number of rock-cut tombs, they would still fall far short of accommodating the majority of Jerusalem's population. The concentration of rock-cut tombs around Jerusalem (with smaller numbers in Jericho and scattered examples elsewhere) reflects the concentration of wealth and attests to their connection with the Jerusalem elite. If rock-cut tombs were used also by members of the lower classes, they should be widespread throughout Judea and Galilee and not limited to the late First Temple and late Second Temple periods. The association of rock-cut tombs and ossuaries with the elite is borne out by inscriptions, some of which name these families.
The numbers, chronology, and distribution of rock-cut tombs indicate that the majority of the ancient Jewish population must have been disposed of in a manner that left few traces in the archaeological landscape, as is true of other ancient societies in the Mediterranean world. For example, John Bodel estimates that known tombs and burials account for only 1.5 percent of ancient Rome's population. In late Republican Rome, large pits called puticoli located outside the city walls contained thousands, and sometimes tens of thousands, of corpses belonging to commoners. Public funerary pyres (ustrinae) adjoined the area where public executions took place. The bodies of the poorest members of society, including executed criminals, were thrown into pits in potter's fields or were disposed of randomly. Similarly, according to tradition, Judas' blood money was used to pay for a potter's field in Jerusalem (Matthew 27:5—8).
Many ancient Jews apparently buried their dead in individual graves dug into the ground, analogous to the way we bury our dead today. In the Iron
Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah, non-elite burials consisted of individual inhumations in simple pit or cist (stone-lined) graves. The practice of burial in pit graves or trench graves continued through the Second Temple period. The body of the deceased, wrapped in a shroud and sometimes placed in a wooden coffin, was laid in a pit or a trench dug into the ground. Sometimes the burial at the base of the trench was sealed off with stone slabs or mud bricks (as at Qumran), before the trench was filled in with dirt. Often, a headstone was erected to mark the site of the grave. The necropolis at Beth Shearim attests to a diversity of burial customs used by the Jewish population, which inside the catacombs included interment in arcosolia (arched niches), loculi, or in stone, lead, terra-cotta, or wood sarcophagi, sometimes with secondary collection of bones in pits or ossuaries, and outside the catacombs included burials in trench graves, cist graves, shaft graves, and even a mausoleum (see the Sidebar).
Because pit graves and trench graves are poor in finds and are much less conspicuous and more susceptible to destruction than rock-cut tombs, relatively few examples are recorded, and the lack of grave goods makes those that are found difficult to date. Qumran provides the best evidence for the use of trench graves in late Second Temple period Judea, where the cemetery is preserved and visible because it is in the desert and was never built over, covered up, or plowed. When graves of this type are found at other sites, scholars often identify them as Essene burials. Although it is possible that some or all of those buried in these cemeteries were Essenes, there is no archaeological evidence to support this assumption. Unlike those at Qumran, the trench graves at other sites are not associated with identifiable remains of Essene settlements, and they contain proportionate numbers of men, women, and children. In fact, the presence of thousands of trench graves in the first - and second-century C. E. Nabatean cemetery at Khirbet Qazone (on the southeast side of the Dead Sea) demonstrates that they are not associated only with Essenes.
The Death and Burial of Jesus
In the ancient world, the method of execution used for capital crimes varied, depending on the nature of the crime and the status of the criminal. Those found guilty by the Sanhedrin (Jewish law court) of violating Jewish law were executed by stoning, burning, decapitation, or strangulation, depending on the crime. Because he was a Roman citizen, Paul was entitled to a trial in Rome (where he apparently was sentenced to death and executed). In contrast, as a lower class Jew from Galilee, Jesus was sentenced to death by Pontius Pilate (the Roman governor of Judea from 26—36 C. E.) and executed by crucifixion. The Romans used crucifixion to punish non-Roman citizens for incitement to rebellion and acts of treason. Roman crucifixion involved using ropes or nails to affix the victim to a wooden stake and crossbeam, a type of hanging that caused slow asphyxiation. This method of execution was generally reserved for lower-class criminals because it was a painful process that could last for days.
According to the Gospel accounts, Jesus was nailed to the cross and expired on the eve of the Sabbath (Friday afternoon; John seems to place the crucifixion on Thursday). A wealthy, prominent Jewish follower of Jesus named Joseph of Arimathea received permission from the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, to inter Jesus' body in his own family's tomb. The synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew, and Luke) are in broad agreement in their description of this event:
Although it was now evening, yet since it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a highly respected member of the council, who was himself living in expectation of the reign of God, made bold to go to Pilate and ask for Jesus' body. . . . And he [Joseph] bought a linen sheet and took him down from the cross and wrapped him in the sheet, and laid him in a tomb that had been hewn out of the rock, and rolled a stone against the doorway of the tomb. (Mark 15:42-46; NRSV)
In the evening a rich man named Joseph of Arimathea, who had himself been a disciple of Jesus, came. He went to Pilate and asked him for Jesus' body. . . . Then Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a piece of clean linen, and laid it in a new tomb that belonged to him, that he had cut in the rock, and he rolled a great stone over the doorway of the tomb, and went away. (Matthew 27:57-60; NRSV)
Joseph of Arimathea seems to have been motivated by a concern for the observance of Jewish law. On one hand, biblical law requires burial within twenty-four hours of death, even for those guilty of the worst crimes. On the other hand, Jewish law prohibits burial on the Sabbath and festivals. Because Jesus expired on the cross on the eve of the Sabbath, he had to be buried before sundown on Friday because waiting until after sundown on Saturday would have exceeded the twenty-four-hour time limit. Because there was no time to prepare a grave, Joseph of Arimathea placed Jesus' body in his family's rock-cut tomb.
In 1968, a rock-cut tomb was discovered in a northern neighborhood of Jerusalem. One of the ossuaries (inscribed with the name Yohanan [John]), contained the remains of a man who had been crucified, as indicated by a nail that was stuck in his heel bone:
The most dramatic evidence that this young man was crucified was the nail which penetrated his heel bones. But for this nail, we might never have discovered that the young man had died in this way. The nail was preserved only because it hit a hard knot when it was pounded into the olive wood upright of the cross. The olive wood knot was so hard that, as the blows on the nail became heavier, the end of the nail bent and curled. We found a bit of the olive wood (between 1 and 2 cm) on the tip of the nail.
11.8 Heel bone and nail of a crucified victim from Jerusalem (upper right), next to a modern reconstruction. Courtesy of Zev Radovan/BibleLandPictures. com.
This wood had probably been forced out of the knot where the curled nail hooked into it. When it came time of the dead victim to be removed from the cross, the executioners could not pull out this nail, bent as it was within the cross. The only way to remove the body was to take an ax or hatchet and amputate the feet. (Vassilios Tzaferis, “Crucifixion — The Archaeological Evidence," Biblical Archaeology Review 11/1 [1985]: 50)
This is an extraordinary discovery because the means by which victims were affixed to crosses usually leave no discernable traces in the physical remains or archaeological record. Some victims were bound with ropes, which were untied when the body was removed from the cross. When nails were used, they were pulled out when the body was removed from the cross. The nail in Yohanan's heel bone was preserved only because it bent after hitting a knot in the wood and therefore could not be removed from the body.
The Gospel accounts of Jesus' burial appear to be largely consistent with the archaeological evidence. In other words, although archaeology does not prove there was a follower of Jesus named Joseph of Arimathea or that Pontius Pilate granted his request for Jesus' body, the Gospel accounts describing Jesus' removal from the cross and burial accord well with archaeological evidence and with Jewish law. The source(s) of these accounts were familiar with the manner in which wealthy Jews living in Jerusalem during the time of Jesus disposed of their dead. The circumstances surrounding Jesus' death and burial can be reconstructed as follows.
Jesus expired on the cross shortly before sundown on Friday. Because Jesus came from a lower-class family that did not own a rock-cut tomb, under ordinary circumstances he would have been buried in a pit grave or trench grave. However, there was no time to prepare (dig) a grave before the beginning of the Sabbath. Joseph of Arimathea, a wealthy follower of Jesus, was concerned to ensure that Jesus was buried before sundown, in accordance with biblical law. Therefore, Joseph hastened to Pilate and requested permission to take Jesus' body. Joseph laid Jesus' body in a loculus in his own rock-cut tomb — an exceptional measure due to the circumstances, as rock-cut tombs were family tombs. When the women entered the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea on Sunday morning, the loculus where Jesus' body had been laid was empty. The theological explanation for this phenomenon is that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. However, once Jesus had been buried in accordance with Jewish law, there was no prohibition against removing the body from the tomb after the end of the Sabbath and reburying it elsewhere. It is therefore possible that followers or family members removed Jesus' body from Joseph's tomb after the Sabbath ended and buried it in a pit grave or trench grave, as it would have been unusual to leave a non-relative in a family tomb. No matter which explanation one prefers, the fact that Jesus' body did not remain in Joseph's tomb means that his bones could not have been collected in an ossuary, at least not if we follow the Gospel accounts.
The Death and Burial of James
After Jesus' death, his brother James became the leader of Jerusalem's early Christian community (technically these were not early Christians, but rather a Jewish sect of Jesus' followers). James apparently was an observant Jew whose pious and ascetic lifestyle earned him the nickname “the Just." We have little direct information about James, as he was marginalized in later western Christian tradition. The New Testament contains the Epistle or Letter of James, although scholars debate whether James was the author of this work or whether someone else wrote it and attributed it to James (in which case it is a pseudepigraphic, or falsely attributed, work). Either way, the attribution of this work to James suggests that he was known for his opposition to the accumulation of wealth and the lifestyle of the wealthy, as illustrated by the following passages (all from the NRSV):
Let the believer who is lowly boast in being raised up, and the rich in being brought low, because the rich will disappear like a flower in the field. For the sun rises with its scorching heat and withers the field; its flower falls, and its beauty perishes. It is the same way with the rich; in the midst of a busy life, they will wither away. (1:9—11)
Has not God chosen the poor in the world to be rich in faith and to be heirs of the kingdom that he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor. Is it not the rich who oppress you? Is it not they who drag you into court? (2:5—6)
Come now, you rich people, weep and wail for the miseries that are coming to you. Your riches have rotted, and your clothes are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have rusted, and their rust will be evidence against you, and it will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure for the last days. Listen! The wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on the earth in luxury and in pleasure. (5:1—5)
The negative views on wealth expressed in the Letter of James are consistent with the nature of the early Christian community in Jerusalem, which Acts describes as having a communal and impoverished lifestyle, although some members came from wealthy families. In this regard, the early Christian community in Jerusalem resembled the Qumran community.
In 62—63 C. E., the Roman governor of Judea died suddenly while in office, and several months passed before his successor arrived from Rome. In the interim, the Jewish high priest Ananus took advantage of the opportunity to condemn James on charges of violating Jewish law and had him executed by stoning. James' opposition to the wealthy, who of course included the high priests, might explain why Ananus had him put to death, as James was otherwise known as a pious and law-abiding Jew. The possibility that the charges were trumped up is also suggested by the fact that the Pharisees protested James' execution when the new Roman governor arrived, and Ananus was removed from office. Josephus provides a contemporary account of this episode: “so he [Ananus the high priest] assembled the sanhedrin of the judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others [or some of his companions;] and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned" (Ant. 20:200).
According to a slightly later source —the second century C. E. church historian Hegesippus — James was buried just below the Temple Mount (presumably in the area of the Kidron Valley or Mount of Olives). Hegesippus mentions that in his time the headstone (Greek stele) marking the grave could still be seen:
So they went up and threw down the Just one, and they said to one another, 'Let us stone James the Just,' and they began to stone him since the fall had not killed him. . . . And a certain man among them, one of the laundrymen, took the club with which he used to beat out the clothes, and hit the Just on the head, and so he suffered martyrdom. And they buried him on the spot by the temple, and his gravestone (stele) still remains by the temple. (apud Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 2.23:15—18; Loeb translation)
Although we do not know whether the grave that Hegesippus mentions contained James' remains, his testimony indicates that within a century of James' death, Christian tradition recalled that he had been buried in a pit grave or trench grave marked by a headstone. This tradition is supported by other evidence. James came from a family of modest means that presumably could not afford a rock-cut tomb. James was the leader of a community whose members lived in communal poverty, and he was known for his ascetic lifestyle and his opposition to the accumulation of wealth and the lifestyle of the wealthy. And unlike Jesus, James did not expire on the cross on the eve of the Sabbath but was executed by the Sanhedrin by stoning, which means there would have been a full twenty-four hours to dispose of his remains. This review of the deaths and burials of Jesus and James concludes our discussion of ancient Jewish tombs and burial customs.
World History
