Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§17.1 Crucifixus sub Pontio Pilato
and their involvement in Jesus' burial can be attributed more plausibly to early
oral memory than to creative story-telling. 104 1 see no reason, therefore, to dissent
from Brown's overall conclusion: 'there is nothing in the basic preGospel account
of Jesus' burial by Joseph that could not plausibly be deemed historical'. 105
In short, we can be fairly confident that the tradition of Jesus' final days
was already being recalled and reflected on from the very earliest days of communal
gatherings of Jesus' followers after Easter 30 CE. The tradition was probably
held within a broad structure, but there was evidently flexibility in what
might be included within the structure, the performances were subject to the
usual variation, and individual episodes were variously elaborated as occasion
allowed. The Evangelists' accounts are in effect frozen examples of such performances.
In particular, the tradition of Jesus' trial, execution, and burial (the Passion
narrative) seems to have been more thoroughly integrated into a single narrative
more or less from the first, possibly for sacred recitation within the early
followers' worship (at Passover?). It often reflects the scriptural passages drawn
in to illuminate the earliest recollections of the events, and gives evidence of the
devotional meditation which the retellings both evoked and came to embody. But
in character, otherwise, it is similar to the oral tradition identifiable throughout
the Gospel tradition and reflects the same traditioning processes. If in the variations
of the tradition we can detect the particular interests of individual churches
or Evangelists, we can also confidently detect in the stabilities of structure and
structural elements the character of the tradition as it was being retold from the
beginning.
What then still needs to be clarified are a number of more specific questions:
can we gain a clearer insight into why Jesus was executed? and can we say
more regarding Jesus' own perception and motivation in the events that transpired?
sceptical but accepts the likelihood that Joseph was the one who undertook the burial, without
following through the corollaries (that the place of Jesus' burial would have been known). Acts
13.29 hardly provides adequate basis for an alternative scenario — that Jesus was laid in a tomb
by unnamed Jews (G. Lüdemann, The Resurrection of Jesus: History, Experience, Theology
[London: SCM, 1994] 43-44); more realistic is E. Haenchen's comment, 'In reality Luke has
only shortened the account as much as possible' (Acts of the Apostles [Oxford: Blackwell,
1971] 410).
104. Cf. K. E. Corley, 'Women and the Crucifixion and Burial of Jesus. "He was Buried:
On the Third Day He Was Raised'", Forum 1 (1998) 181-225; see further below, §18.2a.
105. Death 1241. The archaeological evidence pointing to the traditional site for Jesus'
tomb is surprisingly strong — within the present church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, a
site not brought within the walls of the city till they were extended in 41-43 CE (see further
Charlesworth, Jesus 123-25; Legasse, Trial of Jesus 82-87, 102; Murphy-O'Connor, Holy Land
45-48; M. Broshi in Flusser, Jesus 251-57; J. E. Taylor, 'Golgotha: A Reconsideration of the
Evidence for the Sites of Jesus' Crucifixion and Burial', NTS 44 [1998] 180-203).
783