The Myth of Nazareth: The Invented Town of Jesus (46 page)

In the fifth century, the Deacon of Jerusalem—also with the name Conon—was inspired to commission a mosaic at the site of the Annunciation, one which gave tangible witness to his devotion. That much is true. What is
not
true is the linking of him to an earlier, legendary Conon whom the Church considers to have been a relative of Jesus. This complex of inventive detail is transparently contrived in order to establish an early presence of Jesus’ family in Nazareth. That has been a pre-eminent goal of the Church for a long time, perhaps even since the Middle Ages, as the tenth-century document mentioned above shows. Only an unbroken presence in Nazareth of Jesus’ relatives, from generation to generation, can authenticate the holy sites. The invention of facts and people, the writing of fictitious documents to validate those inventions, the outright defense of such inventions, and the suppression of documents and people who contradict those inventions—these have been major preoccupations of monks, prelates, and inquisitors through the ages.

Graves o/p

Figures:

Viaud 1910:81 “o/p” (fig. 36); Fig. 39 (“Tombeau dans le roc”)

Kopp
1939–40 (JPOS 19, p. 113) Pl  IX, “g–g”

Bagatti 1969 (No figure)

Discussion:

Viaud 1910:95

Kopp
1939–40 (JPOS 19, p. 93)

Bagatti 1969 (No mention)

Two graves (“
tombeaux
”) were identified by Viaud. They are marked “o” and “p” in his figure 36, and are noted in
Illus
. 4. These graves are immediately south of the Chapel of the Angel and, like kokhim shafts, are parallel to one another. They are oriented perpendicularly to Tomb 27, which is only 7m to the northwest. This proximity, together with the alignment, suggests that T. 27 and graves o/p are related. They are certainly close enough to occupy two neighboring tomb chambers connected by a passage which has long since disappeared. We have examples of such multi-chambered kokh tombs elsewhere in Nazareth. Tomb 77, located about 400 m north of the CA (see
Illus
.
5.2
), has three chambers oriented in a straight line and contained at least 24 kokhim.
^[660]
Tomb K22, across the valley, had no less than four chambers, a round blocking stone (“rolling stone”), and an undetermined number of kokhim.
^[661]
Finally, under the Sisters of Nazareth Convent, only 100 m west of the CA, are two kokh tomb chambers which were in all likelihood connected in antiquity. It also had a rolling stone.

Viaud writes that graves o/p are “in a rock-cut funerary chamber.” Much had been damaged by his time, for a stairway existed here long ago. Kopp is not sure what to make of the two graves. “Surely,” he writes, “they tell us something of the existence of the oldest structure and have undergone various changes through the ages, along with the basilica.”
^[662]
The graves are “at least 2 m under the old basilica,” he adds, showing that this is the oldest stratum of the site. The implication is that the tombs preceded the agricultural installations, which are sometimes intrusive. This is an important observation for dating the relative chronology. The tombs apparently were first, followed by the agricultural installations. Even these latter betray different eras, for they occasionally intrude upon one another (
pre-70
cisterns 43 and 44 in
Illus
.
5.4
).

Conclusions

It is clear from the preceding pages that the venerated sites are located in the midst of a necropolis and, furthermore, that the site of the Annunciation is situated in a Roman tomb. Tomb 29 is a scant five meters east of Tomb 27, which in turn is less than 10m from graves o/p. All these burials abut the “Chapel of the Angel.” It is probable that in Roman times they all belonged to a multi-chambered tomb complex, one no more elaborate than others in the basin.

Additional Roman Period tombs may have been in the immediate vicinity, as suggested by Meistermann and Mansur early in the twentieth century. However, one looks in vain in the standard Nazareth literature for any mention of burials in the venerated area. For example, in his popular
The
Archaeology of the New Testament
, Jack Finegan offers a map with the tombs of the basin.
^[663]
Not only are none noted in the venerated area, but even tombs 70 and 73 are omitted. The former lies only 30 m south of the CA. It has thirteen kokhim, yielded numerous artefacts from the Roman period, and has been extensively documented by Bagatti and others. The latter tomb is also of the kokh type and lies under the Sisters of Nazareth Convent, 100 m west of the CA. Finegan omits all tombs within a radius of 300 m of the CA.

Again, James Strange’s article “Nazareth” in the
Anchor Bible Dictionary
(arguably the most referenced scholarly source on the site) mentions caves, a “Jewish-Christian synagogue,” a “Jewish ritual bath,” and “Herodian” tombs on the outskirts of the village—which, according to Strange, enjoyed a renaissance in the Hellenistic Period. It is difficult to imagine a portrait of the settlement farther from the truth.

The Church has asserted that habitations have existed continuously in the venerated area since the time of Abraham.144  Conflicting scriptural traditions have resulted in confusion on the ground, as different traditions vied for “the truth” and established competing shrines. The imagination of pilgrim and scholar alike has been allowed free rein, so long as it conformed with catholic doctrine. For example, reading in the scriptures that Jesus preached in the Nazareth synagogue (Lk 4), one writer follows Bagatti and Strange, suggesting an unattested synagogue already in Roman times: “All this was part of an early church before Constantine’s time, a church built on a synagogue plan.”145  No such early structure is known. It could not have been at the Church of the Annunciation, for the tradition has insisted that Mary lived there. She certainly did not live in a synagogue! (As we have seen, the locus was among tombs.) Elsewhere (
Exc
. 25, 233–34) Bagatti writes that the synagogue was “north of St. Joseph’s church.” Thus, he apparently proposes
two
ancient synagogues. All this is part of the confusion mentioned above, as orthodoxy tries to reconcile tradition in opposition to empirical fact, often enough simply concluding what is convenient.

In insisting that Jesus’ village existed in the vicinity of the Franciscan property, catholic doctrine requires a double displacement—in space and time. In space, because the village was in fact located on the valley floor; in time, because it came into existence in the second century of our era. Furthermore, the Roman tombs conclusively show that no one lived on the hillside or in the venerated area while the settlement was Jewish, that is, until the seventh century.
^[664]

It would appear that the tradition has fallen victim to the ancient scriptures it reveres, which relate that Jesus’ town was on a mountain. Long ago the early pilgrims embraced the idea and, finding grottos on the slope of the Nebi Sa‘in, they chose a cave as the dwelling of Mary and as the site of the Annunciation. Thus, the fourth century pilgrim Egeria was shown “a big and very splendid cave in which [
Mary
] lived.”
^[665]
Such legends are understandable.

But they are not true.

Chapter Six

Nazareth and
Nazara

(70 CE–337 CE)

Between the Revolts

Chronology 60 CE–135 CE

Contested dates and/or events are italicized.

CE

60                  Martyrdom of Paul 
                                                              [Koester II:104]

62                  Martyrdom of James the Just
                                           [Schürer I:ii.187]

64                  Nero’s persecution of Christians accused of setting fire to Rome

66       Beginning of the First Jewish War

68                  Destruction of Qumran

70                  Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, including the Temple

73                  Roman capture of Masada; final end of hostilities

79                  Eruption of Mt. Vesuvius, destruction of Pompeii

c
. 70–130    
Establishment of Nazareth

c
. 95              Persecution under Domitian
                   [Grant 79]

115–117   Jewish revolt in Cyrene, Cyprus, and Egypt

                        Ignatius writes letters en route to Rome and martyrdom

132–135 Second Jewish War

Chronology 135 CE–337 CE

144                 Marcion expelled from Rome; Valentinus teaches

157                 Montanus teaches

160                 Justin, “Dialog with Trypho”

c
. 177       Martyrdom of Christians in Lyons; Tatian’s “Diatessaron
”
;

               
Pantaenus visits India and then establishes Catechetical school at Alexandria

c
. 220     Julius Africanus mentions the villages of “Nazara and Cochaba.” This is probably the first reference to Nazareth not based in                                 scripture (quoted in Eusebius,
Hist
. I.7)

231         Origen banished from Alexandria, establishes Caesarea school

250        Persecution under Decius

303                 Emperor Diocletian designates Feb. 23 as date for the “termination of

                Christianity”; persecution follows

307        Accession of pro-Christian Constantine in the East

309        Diocletian erects a colossal statue to the sun god at Sirmium on the

                Danube; Constantine also worships the sun

311        Edict of Milan extends toleration to Christians

312        Under Christian banners, Constantine is victorious at battle of Milvian bridge; embraces Christianity

319        Arius champions subordinationist teaching

324        Constantine sole emperor

325        Constantine convenes the Council of Nicaea

c
. 335     Joseph of Tiberias possibly builds a Christian shrine in Nazareth

337        Death of Constantine

After a prolonged siege and aided by deep divisions within the defending Jewish population, the Romans under Titus took the city of Jerusalem in September, 70 CE. The temple was in flames, and the invaders systematically exterminated the survivors before razing the city to the ground—leaving only three gates and part of the wall standing.
^[666]
Titus celebrated his victory in Caesarea before returning to Rome, but the war was by no means over as rebels controlled much of the countryside, including several fortresses. It took three more years for the Romans to reduce these obstinate pockets of resistance, culminating in the legendary mass suicide at Masada (April, 73 CE).

Following the war, the emperor Vespasian made Palestine “a private possession, and the taxes levied went into his own purse.” Schürer continues:

The inhabitants of Palestine became impoverished, and by the seven years’ war their number had been terribly reduced. A Jewish magistracy, of the kind formerly possessed, no longer existed. The one gathering point which still remained for the people was the law. Around this they now gathered with anxious and scrupulous faithfulness, and with the indomitable hope that some day, under an established civil government, and even among the nations of the world, it would come again to have a recognized place and practical authority.
^[667]

After the First Jewish War a series of governors administered Judea (now a separate Roman province) from Caesarea. The depopulated and completely destroyed city of Jerusalem functioned as little more than headquarters of the tenth legion Fretensis. Pagan cities were established, such as Flavia Neapolis near Shechem in Samaria. A center of Jewish revival appeared at Jamnia (Jabne) near the coast, largely due to the efforts of the Pharisee Johanan ben Zakkai, an elderly merchant and judge. Jamnia had been a Jewish town since Maccabean times, and now that the Pharisees were in the ascendancy it was quickly made a center of Rabbinic studies. Johanan established an informal council there which became known as the Sanhedrin, and its president the Rabban. The council “was gradually recognized by the Romans as exercising control over the religious affairs of Judaea, and even of the Dispersion as well.”
^[668]
  Jamnia maintained a preeminent position in the years between the two Jewish revolts, after which Sepphoris (Diocaesarea) and Tiberias in the Galilee assumed dominance.