Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sources

Burial Box of James the Brother of Jesus

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

Andre Lemaire is an epigrapher, and this Biblical Archaeology Review article is his own publication announcing the so-called James Ossuary and reading its Aramaic inscription as James son of Joseph brother of Jesus. Its significance is that it is the original publication that brought the object to scholarly and public attention with Lemaire's own epigraphic reading. Its limit is substantial and is the reason for its tier two placement, the ossuary's authenticity was subsequently the subject of an Israeli forgery trial, and while the box itself is now generally accepted as ancient, the inscription's authenticity and its connection to the Jesus of the New Testament remain genuinely disputed among specialists, so a claim treating the identification as settled should be checked against that ongoing controversy.

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
2
Published in Biblical Archaeology Review, a magazine aimed at a broad readership interested in biblical archaeology rather than a strictly peer reviewed academic journal; Lemaire's own account of an ossuary inscription whose authenticity has since been disputed, hence the middle tier.
Notes
The publication that announced the ossuary and read its Aramaic inscription "James son of Joseph brother of Jesus".
Citation
Author
Andre Lemaire
Publisher
Biblical Archaeology Review (28:6)
Publication Year
2002
URL
https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/28/6
Source Type
journal
Claims Backed By This Source (31 claims)

This source backs 31 claims across the atlas. As facts: 20 well-attested, 4 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 3 holds, 1 connected. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Artifacts & Relics, 10 claims: 4 well-attested, 2 scholarly debate, 3 holds, 1 general references.
  • Open Questions, 8 claims: 6 well-attested, 1 connected, 1 general references.
  • Sources, 8 claims: 8 well-attested.
  • Figures, 3 claims: 2 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
  • Articles, 2 claims: 2 well-attested.

Scholarly debate

4

Artifacts & Relics

Holds

3

Artifacts & Relics

Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.