While most of the Christian world believes that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is Jesus’ burial place, to the best of our knowledge the site was only sanctified in the 4th century CE. The question arises whether this identification, made 300 years after the events occurred, is indeed correct?

Historical Evidence from the First Century AD

1. The New Testament

The four Gospels of the New Testament provide the most detailed source for the location of Jesus’ crucifixion and burial. Let’s examine each:

Matthew 27 details Jesus’ crucifixion alongside two criminals without specifying the location, and describes how at evening, a rich man named Joseph of Arimathea buried him in his own tomb and rolled a stone over it.

Mark15 specifies that Jesus was crucified with two thieves at “Golgotha, which means Place of the Skull.” In the evening, Joseph of Arimathea buried him in a “tomb cut out of rock and rolled a stone against the entrance.” On Sunday, when several women returned to the tomb, they were surprised to find the stone removed, and inside, on the right side, sat an unknown man who told them Jesus had risen and was no longer there.

Luke 23 describes how Jesus was crucified at “the place called Golgotha” with two criminals. After his death, Joseph of Arimathea, described as a member of the Sanhedrin, buried Jesus in his new rock-cut tomb. On Sunday, several women came to the tomb to find it open and empty.

John 19, perhaps the most important version, details how Jesus was crucified with two others at “the place called Golgotha, that is, Place of the Skull.” (17) It specifically notes that “the place was near the city.” (20) After his death, Joseph of Arimathea, described as a secret disciple of Jesus, came with a man named Nicodemus to bury him. Regarding their location, it states: “At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid.” (41) In the following chapter, John describes how Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and found it open and empty, and later Jesus appeared to her, though she didn’t recognize him immediately.

Aside from the Gospels, in the Letter to the Hebrews (likely intended for a Hebrew-speaking community), Chapter 13 verse 12 also notes that “Jesus… suffered outside the gate.” This detail again confirms that Jesus was crucified outside the city (as documented in John’s Gospel) and suggests it was near one of the city gates.

2. Other Historical Sources:

Despite the site’s and subject’s importance to the Christian world, frustratingly there is no other historical evidence for the location of Jesus’ crucifixion and burial from the first century CE. Even Flavius Josephus, who is a very detailed source for first-century Jerusalem, does not mention Golgotha, Jesus’ burial place, or even the “Praetorium,” the site of Jesus’ trial (Mark 15:16). In fact, Josephus mentions Jesus himself only in one brief paragraph (Antiquities XVIII.3.3), even shorter than his description of John the Baptist (Antiquities XVIII.5.2 116-119).

(No) Historical Evidence from the First to Fourth Centuries AD

In 66 CE a revolt broke out in Judea against Roman rule, leading to the destruction of the land, Jerusalem, and its Temple. Eusebius, a Christian historian from the fourth century CE, that during the Great Jewish Revolt, the Christian community fled to Pella in Jordan (Ecclesiastical History III.5.3). However, elsewhere he notes that until Hadrian’s time, a large Christian community remained in Jerusalem (XX.8.108). He also lists the bishops’ names, but after Hadrian’s time, their names are no longer Jewish. This issue is crucial in suggesting the possibility that a Christian community remained in Jerusalem that remembered Golgotha’s location, as there is no other historical or archaeological evidence for a Christian community remaining in Jerusalem after 70 CE.

While Eusebius is considered a reliable source, especially his geographical reviews (e.g. the Onomasticon), his writing of Christian history is quite apologetic. For example, one should be suspicious of his description of how the Romans tried to conceal and desecrate Jesus’ burial site by placing a statue of Venus above it. Jerome, another Christian theologian from the fifth century CE, presents a similar description, declaring that the Romans placed a statue of Venus (or Aphrodite) above Golgotha and a statue of Jupiter above the tomb.

Historical Evidence from the Fourth Century AD

Following Constantine’s victory over Constantius at the Milvian Bridge (28.10.312), he decided to permit Christian worship in the Roman Empire, as established in the “Edict of Milan” (313 CE). In 324 CE, he defeated Licinius and became sole ruler. Subsequently, he decided to unite the Church and resolve the Arian controversy. Indeed, in 325 CE, the Council of Nicaea established the Christian Creed, and the Arian faction was defined as heresy.

The most important historian of that period is Eusebius of Caesarea. Although his writings contain clear Christian apologetics, they are detailed and unique for many subjects and events of those days. In his book “Life of Constantine,”  Eusebius summarizes Constantine’s work, especially in the Christian context. In chapter 3:25-40 he details how Jesus’s tomb was desecrated by building a temple to Aphrodite above it. Then in paragraphs 30-31, he presents Constantine’s letter to Macarius, the Bishop of Jerusalem, ordering him to clear the temple and build a basilica to sanctify the tomb.

The description doesn’t contain information how the location of the tomb was known, and there is no mention of Golgotha or parts of the cross. There is mention of “the most holy place of suffering,” which some scholars believe hints at Golgotha, but this is not definitive.

It’s important to add that in the following paragraphs (41-43), Eusebius presents Constantine’s mother, Helena, visiting the Holy Land, identifying and sanctifying Jesus’ birthplace in Bethlehem, and his place of ascension on Mount of Olives. Later, it’s mentioned that the church on the Mount of Olives also sanctifies a cave where Jesus taught his disciples the secrets of the world (=the Little Apocalypse, Mark 13:3). But nowhere is there a description of Helena discovering the place, or even visiting it!

The Construction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and the Legend of the Finding of the Cross

In “Life of Constantine” IV.46, Eusebius notes that Constantine completed building the Martyrion in the 30th year of his reign, that is 335 CE. Here too, there is no description of Golgotha or the finding of the cross. However, five years later, in 340 CE, Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, declares several times in his sermons the existence of some pieces of the cross (Catechetical Lectures X.19, XIV.14, 19).

A detailed description of a sacred relic of the cross appears in the account of the Spanish pilgrim Egeria’s (around 384 CE), who describes the presentation of the cross on Good Friday:

“Then the bishop’s throne is placed at Golgotha behind the cross standing there now. The bishop sits on the throne, before him is placed a table covered with a cloth, the deacons stand around the table, and bring forth a silver and gold box containing the holy wood of the cross. It is opened and displayed, and they place on the table the wood of the cross and the inscription (‘King of the Jews’).” (37.1).

Later she adds:

“And since it is said that someone, I know not when, bit off a piece of the holy wood and stole it, the deacons who stand around guard it thus lest anyone coming to dare to do so again” (37.2)

And in 395, we first hear in Ambrose’s eulogy for Theodosius’s death about the legend of Helena finding the cross. It describes how she uncovered three crosses and even the inscription placed above Jesus’s cross. But she didn’t know which was the true one. Macarius, Bishop of Jerusalem, brings her to an incurably ill woman, and only the true cross causes her immediate miraculous healing. Later, additional versions of the story emerge.

Moreover, according to Rufinus (Church History, X.10-15, XI.7-8), Helena sends part of the cross to her son, Constantine, along with some nails she found nearby. He incorporates them into his helmet and his horse’s bridle. Another piece of the cross is left in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Scholars like Drijvers believe that Helena’s discovery of the cross is a legend, created to rationalize the existence of relics of the cross. I would add that the legend was also forged to prove Jesus’s tomb, since the crosses were apparently discovered nearby. But if we ignore this legend, can we be certain that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is indeed built above Jesus’s tomb?

So, Is the Church of the Holy Sepulchre Built Above Jesus’s Tomb? The Archaeological Evidence

The legend of finding the cross emerged at least 70 years after Constantine ordered the uncovering and construction of a basilica above the tomb, and in any case, the legend of finding the cross doesn’t claim that the cross was discovered near the tomb.

How then can we know if the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is indeed built above Jesus’s tomb? The only possibility, which is difficult if not impossible to prove, is that a Christian community in Jerusalem never ceased to preserve the tomb’s location. The only evidence for this is Eusebius, who lists a succession of leaders of this community, and even he declares that during the Great Jewish Revolt the community fled to Pella. There is also no archaeological evidence for the existence of a Christian community in Jerusalem before the fourth century CE. This doesn’t mean such a community didn’t exist, but the lack of historical and archaeological sources makes it difficult to confirm its existence. This makes it also difficult to confirm the existence of a tradition that remembered the tomb’s location.

On the other hand, archaeological analysis of the tomb and comparing its details with the descriptions in the Gospels is quite compelling. Here are the main arguments:

A. The Tomb’s Style is Typical of Second Temple Period Elite

As known, burial forms and tombs vary across cultures and periods. In the late Roman and Byzantine periods, cremation and trough burial were more common. The shape of the tomb in the holy sepulchre, is typical to Jewish burial customs of the later part of the second Temple Period. It is an arcosolium type, which is less common than kokhim tombs and more characteristic of the upper class (see for example the “Tomb of the Kings” and the “Tomb of the Hezir Family”). Indeed, according to the Gospels, the tomb was originally created by Joseph of Arimathea, described in Matthew 27:57 as a “rich man,” and in Mark 15:42 and Luke 23:50 as a member of the Sanhedrin.

B. The Tomb Appears to Have Been New

Unlike the Tomb of the Kings and the Tomb of the Hezir Family, the tomb in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre contains only one burial chamber. This seems to indicate that the tomb was new. Indeed, most Gospels state that the tomb was new (Matthew 27:60; Luke 23:53; John 19:42).

C. The Burial Bench is on the Right Side

Even the fact that the burial ledge is on the right side matches a note in the New Testament. In Mark’s version, when the women come to the empty tomb, they see a man sitting on its right side (Mark 16:5).

D. The Tomb is Hewn from Rock

Since the fourth century, a small chapel has stood above the tomb (Aedicula). And although the shape of the tomb is typical of the Second Temple period, until recently it couldn’t be proven that it was indeed carved into rock. Even the rebuilding of the aedicula in 1810 wasn’t accompanied by scientific documentation of it being originally rock-cut. The proof that it is indeed a rock-cut tomb was achieved relatively recently, when conservation work was done on the tomb and during which the marble slab above the burial bench was removed. Beneath it was indeed bedrock. This proves that the tomb’s walls were originally carved from bedrock.

E. The Tomb is Close to Golgotha

30 meters southeast of the tomb there is a rock mass identified as the Golgotha, the place of Jesus’s crucifixion. Being bedrock indicates that like the hewn tomb, it too is ancient and stood there during the Second Temple period. Its proximity to the tomb matches the description in John’s Gospel stating that the tomb was close to the place of crucifixion (19:41).

F. A Nearby Kokhim Tomb 

15 meters west of the Jesus’ tomb there exists another tomb also dated to the late Second Temple period. This is a rock-cut tomb containing five kokhim (burial shafts), of which two are still open. Christian tradition holds that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus are buried there. Although it contains no dating material or inscriptions, its form is typical of the late Second Temple period. The existence of another Second Temple period tomb proves that this area was a burial area, and if so, this area was outside the city limits since Jews always buried their dead outside the city. Many attempts have been made to locate Jerusalem’s walls in the late Second Temple period, especially the route of the “Second Wall.” Although sufficient evidence has not yet been found, the existence of an arcosolium tomb and a kokhim tomb in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre complex proves that this area was certainly outside the city around the time of Jesus.

Furthermore, being close to the Golgotha indicates the Golgotha was most likely outside the city as well. Indeed, John 19:20 reports that the crucifixion was outside the city, and likewise in Hebrews 13:12.

G. Brown Garden Soil

John’s Gospel (19:41) also notes that both the crucifixion and burial were in a garden. brown garden soil was found in excavations of the Vartan Chapel east of the tomb, and recently additional large quantities of brown soil were found during La Sapienza University’s conservation project around the tomb and Golgotha (not yet published). The brown soil suggest the area of the tomb of Jesus may have been a garden in antiquity, as mentioned in the John’s Gospel.

Conclusion

In the 19^th century some scholars raised their doubts on whether the Jesus’ tomb was in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (for example, Edward Robinson). Some even proposed an alternative site north of Damascus Gate, which is maintained to this day by a Christian organization (the Garden Tomb). However, the archaeological evidence supports the identification at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and findings from recent years strengthen this identification.

It should be remembered that when the tomb was exposed and consecrated in the fourth century CE, it was within the city limits, contrary to the Gospel descriptions. The fact that the tomb’s identification was still accepted strengthens the view that there were indeed those who preserved the tomb’s location during the late Roman period.