You perhaps do not recognize the above three-dimensional statue of the head and face of a certain young non-Western gentleman. Take notice of his features: brown or dark-skinned; thick, dark and curly kinky short hair; dark or brown eyes. You should know that this is the head and face of Jesus of Nazareth which was reconstructed by an interdisciplinary team of the BBC (in London) for a special broadcasting programme launched during Easter 2001 called Son of God. The head of this unfamiliar Jesus was created by means of a scientific method employing medical, archaeological, geographical, artistic and forensic evidence from the time of Jesus himself. This interdisciplinary science is known as forensic anthropology.
The BBC production team which produced this image of Jesus worked with a first-century male skull discovered in Israel. This team declared, “Jewish heads are very different today to 2000 years ago, so the team looked for a Jewish skull from the period of Jesus.”
The BBC production team which produced this image of Jesus worked with a first-century male skull discovered in Israel. This team declared, “Jewish heads are very different today to 2000 years ago, so the team looked for a Jewish skull from the period of Jesus.”
Using a plaster cast of the skull, the forensic medical artist Richard Neave from the University of Manchester commenced to reconstruct the face by building up layers of clay to represent muscle, fat and skin. Details such as the hair were decided by considering the hair of males in the Middle East which tends to be thick, dark and curly, together with hair styles current in the time of Jesus. The final image of Jesus’ head was produced as a 3-D computer model.
Joe Zias, an Israeli archaeologist, said, “In reconstructing this head, we are not claiming that this is exactly Jesus’ face, but we are trying to counteract all those bad images of blond-haired, blue-eyed Jesuses running through in Hollywood productions.”
The presenter of the Son of God broadcast, Jeremy Brown, stated that “He was not the blond, blue-eyed character seen so often in Easter cards. The image we have constructed is far more realistic.”
If we trace back to centuries earlier, we shall find images of Jesus which were not produced by the Renaissance artists, which represent non-white-skinned Jesuses.
If we trace back to centuries earlier, we shall find images of Jesus which were not produced by the Renaissance artists, which represent non-white-skinned Jesuses.
Note the following images of Jesus which are more similar to the image of Jesus of Nazareth reconstructed by the BBC team mentioned above than to the image of the European white-skinned Jesus.
This image of the dark-skinned and black-eyed and haired Jesus is dated 530 CE, found in a church of Rome. This portrait of the face of Jesus is totally different from those of the Renaissance era.
This black woman statue is well-known as the Black Madonna who is taking her black-skinned child Jesus on her lap. This Black Madonna is not the Madonna created generally by modern black theologians both in Africa and in North America in accordance with their unique “black” theological perspectives.
More than five hundred Black Madonnas were sculptured in black stones or black woods by many artists during the pre-Renaissance era, precisely during the Middle Ages (11th-15th c. CE), beginning in Italy, and currently are scattered throughout Europe housed or enshrined in many churches, temples, holy places and museums.
Why did they imagine Mary and her child as black-skinned? The most reasonable explanation is that they knew a historical tradition attesting that the historical Mary and the historical Jesus were black-skinned Middle Eastern human beings.
The picture above is one of the Ethiopian black-eyed Jesus, and was made in 17th century. The color of his face skin and his hair is dark, thoroughly different from the color of the Jesus of the Renaissance era.
The image above is the image of the dark-skinned and dark-eyed Jesus with thick, kinky and black hair, dated 1960. His face is rather similar to the face of the Jesus of the BBC discussed above.
Finally, what is the conclusion we can draw? Nothing else than that the white-skinned, long, wavy and blond-haired and blue-eyed Jesus of the Renaissance era is not the Jesus of history. Christians accustomed to turning their face and heart to ancient Europe in seeking for their theological and spiritual resources will certainly not like the Jesus that has been reconstructed by the BBC’s professional team.
Finally, what is the conclusion we can draw? Nothing else than that the white-skinned, long, wavy and blond-haired and blue-eyed Jesus of the Renaissance era is not the Jesus of history. Christians accustomed to turning their face and heart to ancient Europe in seeking for their theological and spiritual resources will certainly not like the Jesus that has been reconstructed by the BBC’s professional team.
For Constantinian orthodox Christians the world over, this kind of non-Western Jesus is really an insult, actually a Jesus so heterodox that should be rejected and anathematized.
I am in harmony with James Cone’s judgment concerning the dark-skinned Jesus that “for whites to find Jesus with big lips and kinky hair is as offensive as it was for the Pharisees to find him partying with tax-collectors. But whether whites want to hear it or not, Christ is black, baby, with all of the features which are detestable to white society.”
One should remember that in heterodoxy we often find truth more obviously and more authentically than in orthodoxy. Happy are those who are heterodox!
For further information concerning forensic anthropology in relation to the reconstruction of the face of Jesus, see
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/forensics/1282186