Jesus is not a northern European

The video above made me laugh quite a lot. Though there is some exaggeration, in that Jesus is unlikely to have been black, nevertheless, it is true that Jesus’ skin color would not have been northern European white. In 2015, a forensic anthropologist, named Richard Neave, reconstructed a possible typical Semitic face of the time and said that this was the closest we could most probably get to what Jesus might have looked like.

While this reconstruction is not northern European white, neither is it south-of-the-Sahara African. It is to be noted that the coloration and features are olive-skinned, with brown hair and eyes, which is rather far away from northern European white. But, it is certainly much likely to be closer to the historical reality of the time than other conceptions. Isaiah 53 points out that, “He has no form or comeliness; and when we see Him, there is no beauty that we should desire Him.” I will guarantee you that a tall blue-eyed northern European would have stuck out badly in Palestine. More than that, it would have confirmed in many people’s mind the idea that Mary, the teenager, had misbehaved. No, northern European is out.

But, that is not to say that there was no possibility of south-of-the-Sahara African features in Jesus’ lineage. Jesus’ own family genealogy shows a willingness to marry outside the tribes of Israel. From Tamar to Rahab to Ruth, three women are mentioned who come from outside the Twelve Tribes. From the tribe of Levi, Moses married a black woman, which caused racial problems with Miriam. “Then Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married; for he had married an Ethiopian woman.” It says that she was from Cush, in Southern Ethiopia, an African black area. Solomon, one of Jesus’ great-great-great-etc.-grandparents very probably also married a black woman.  The Queen of Sheba, who came to see him, may have come from what is now South Yemen (Saba) or from the Kingdom of Seba which is in the area of the horn of Africa, later the Kingdom of Aksum, in the northern part of Ethiopia. It is this second possibility which was claimed by the old Kings of Ethiopia. It is notable, then, that God had Philip encounter an Ethiopian who was evangelized, as both Ethiopia and Armenia claim the title of the first established Christian country. Thus, it could be said that God was reaching out to a people who had reached out to the Jews many centuries before, and who took in refugees after the fall of the Kingdom of Judah. But, northern Ethiopia is still an African black area.

But, most interesting is the story of love found in the Song of Solomon. In that song, the bride says, “I am dark but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem, like the tents of Kedar, like the curtains of Solomon. Do not look upon me, because I am dark, because the sun has tanned me. My mother’s sons were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards, but my own vineyard I have not kept.” No one is quite sure from where this woman came. She is called a Shulamite, but that is also the female version of Solomon, Shulamon. Thus, she could be simply be understood to be Solomon’s bride. Or, it could be a place name, but there are several candidates for which place. But, two things are clear. She was the first and most beloved of Solomon’s many wives and she was very dark. I say very dark because Semitic people of that time would already have been considered as “colored” by the old-timey racial definitions found in America (and other countries, most notably South Africa). Since she is clearly darker than they, that would make her essentially black.

So, could Jesus have had some “Ethiopian” features? Well, yes, some … but, it would not have been enough to be widely noticed. Remember what is said in Isaiah 53 about having “no form or comeliness.” Had Jesus shown clear “Ethiopian” features, I guarantee you that this would have been noted somewhere, particularly since the Jews of that time were extremely proud of their tribal descent. This is why the genealogies in the Scriptures are so important. Tribal descent was something tracked, and immensely important. Features that would indicate “outside” mixtures would have been noted and would have added to the rejection that Jesus experienced in his third year, particularly since there is no archeological evidence of those types of features being present in the culture of Palestine at that time, any more than tall, white, and blue-eyed features were present.

But, the video above actually makes an interesting point. Had Jesus had blue eyes and been white and a little taller than the surrounding culture, he might very well have received better treatment at the hands of the Romans, at least to begin with. Why do I say that? Well, Roman citizens had very clear, and heavily protected rights. Had Jesus looked like someone from the northern Italy or northern Greece area, the Romans would most certainly have asked him a few questions first. One need only look at the life of Saint Paul the Apostle to see how he used his Roman citizenship and his rights of appeal to good advantage. In at least one situation, the entire town council turned out to apologize to him because they realized that the beating that Saint Paul received violated the rights of a Roman citizen. So the joke in the video about Jesus’ beating by the authorities does make a small, but reasonable, point.

Well, I do not know what Jesus looked like. I will find out someday. But, in the meantime, it is enjoyable to go through the anthropological possibilities.