DAILY MAIL
He is one of the most instantly recognisable figures in the Western world.
But experts say that every image you’ve seen of Jesus is almost certainly inaccurate.
Not only would Jesus definitely not have had flowing locks, he is also unlikely to have grown a long beard or even worn robes.
Instead, historians believe that Jesus would have looked like any other unremarkable member of Judean society in the first century AD.
But there is one surprising detail that modern depictions of Jesus do get right.
While it might seem odd that Jesus is often depicted with rippling abs, experts agree that he probably would have been strong and lean.
Dr Meredith Warren, senior lecturer on Biblical and religious studies at Sheffield University, told MailOnline that these muscular depictions aren’t ‘completely off the mark’.
She says: ‘Jesus comes from a family where manual labour is the norm, and he certainly gets exercise with all the walking around.’
Unlike so many of our modern interpretations, experts think Jesus would have had dark skin, brown eyes, and short curly hair. For clothing, he would have worn a simple knee-length tunic and a woollen mantle
The version of Jesus we are most familiar with often has brown, flowing shoulder-length hair and a full beard.
However, neither of these ideas matches up with what we know about the historical figure of Jesus.
One of the few things we know for certain is that Jesus was ethnically Judean and came from the region which is now modern-day Palestine.
This means his hair and beard would have been black and curly rather than brown and straight.
Likewise, it is extremely likely that Jesus would have worn his hair and beard quite short.
Just like today, beards tended to go in and out of fashion in the Roman world over the years.
Around the time of Jesus’ life in the first century AD, we think that being clean-shaven was extremely important to Romans but, as a Jew, Jesus probably did grow a well-kept beard.
Paintings of Jesus often show a man with pale skin, long hair, and a full beard. However, experts say that none of these details are correct
Beard and hair
Jesus would have had short, curly hair and a well-trimmed beard.
Facial features
Jesus was ethnically Judean and would have been Middle Eastern in appearance. He would have had dark skin and brown eyes.
Body type
Jesus would have been lean and wiry due to manual labour and poor diet.
Clothing
Jesus would have worn a short tunic and an undyed woollen mantle with tassels.
Roman coins from the period show captive Judeans sporting short curly beards which suggests this might have been the fashion of the time.
Joan Taylor, professor of Christian origins at King’s College London, told MailOnline: ‘To have long hair and a long beard signalled something in ancient Judaism – that you were keeping a special vow and not drinking wine.
‘Jesus was actually accused of drinking too much, so he was not keeping such a vow.’
In fact, some of the very first depictions we have of Jesus show him looking distinctly well-groomed.
Paintings dating from the first half of the third century AD found the church in the ruined city of Dura-Europos in Syria show Jesus clean-shaven with hair cut well above his collar.
However, like so many of our modern depictions of Jesus, these characteristics say more about the culture of the time than they do about the historical figure.
In the first century AD, Professor Taylor says that long hair on men was considered ‘rather unseemly’.
However, by the fourth century AD, images of Jesus began to feature long hair and beards depending on what the artists wanted to emphasise.
The very earliest image of Jesus from the church in the ruined city of Dura-Europos shows a man with short hair and no beard. Long hair would have only been worn by Jewish men when they were taking a vow involving abstaining from wine
This third-century image shows Moses parting the Red Sea. Experts think this style of short hair and beard is the most likely option for how Jesus would have styled himself
Dr Warren says: ‘If they want to connect Jesus with the notion of the Good Shepherd or make parallels with Roman ideas about Dionysus or Apollo, he’ll have longer hair; likewise if they want to emphasise Jesus as Philosopher, who would have a longer beard.
‘Later, when we get the idea of an all-powerful Christ as Creator, his depiction aligns with the way Zeus or Jupiter is imaged: with beard and longer hair.’
Strikingly, the Bible does not include many descriptions of Jesus’ appearance.
But based on the few biographical details we have experts have pieced together some details of his likely facial features.
Dr Warren says: ‘Jesus would have had brown skin, brown eyes, like the local population.
‘He died before he was 40. He wasn’t rich and would have spent a lot of time outdoors, so some lines on that face, probably. His hands and feet were probably calloused and rough.’
To get more specific details, experts have to look at other people living in the region at the time.
Starting from the fourth century, Byzantine images of Jesus start to show a man with pale skin and Western features
In reality, experts say that Jesus would have looked more like the men shown in the Egyptian mummy paintings from the first century AD (pictured). These show dark-skinned men with brown eyes and curly hair
One of the few things the Bible tells us about Jesus’s appearance is how indistinct he appeared to be.
When soldiers come to take him from the Garden of Gethsemane they needed Judas to point him out amongst the crowd of other Judean men.
Likewise, in the Gospel of John, Mary Magdalene mistakes him for a gardener when she goes looking for his body.
From these pieces of information, some scholars have inferred that Jesus might have looked very much like other men of the period and didn’t have many distinctive features.
In her opinion, Dr Warren thinks the best representations of how Jesus might have looked come from the Egyptian mummy portraits.
These paintings were made of men who died between 80 and 120 AD in a similar part of the world to Jesus.
They show men with dark eyes, brown skin, short curly hair, beards and facial features which would have been distinctive of people living in what is now Egypt, Palestine, and Israel.
Likewise, in 2015, medical artist Richard Neave used forensic techniques to reconstruct the face of a Judean man by studying Semite skulls.
Retired medical artist Richard Neave has recreated the face of a first-century Judean (pictured) using forensic techniques and Semite skulls found in archaeological excavations
Richard Neave’s reconstruction shows what a man from the region might have looked like. Lacking other distinctive features, Jesus might have looked much like this recreation
The portrait revealed a wide face, dark eyes, a bushy beard and short curly hair, as well as a tanned complexion which might have been typical of Jews in the Galilee area.
While this is just a portrait of an adult man living at the same time as Jesus, this reconstruction gives us a better idea of what kind of features he may have had.
Across statues and paintings of Christ, one of the most oddly consistent features is that the son of God is often depicted with chiselled abs.
While this might seem like an absurd detail to include, experts say that it’s not that crazy when we consider the details of Jesus’ life.
Professor Taylor says: ‘Jesus did a lot of walking, during his mission, and his trade was as a carpenter or constructor, so he was not a couch potato.
‘He and his disciples essentially lived on hospitality, charity and they shared food, so I don’t think he ate that much. I see him more as wiry than bulky.’
This means that statues of Jesus with a six-pack probably aren’t as far from reality as you might think.
Jesus is often depicted with bulging muscles and chiselled abs. While experts say that Jesus probably wouldn’t have been extremely muscly, his manual labour and poor diet would have made him wiry and strong. Pictured: ‘It Is Finished’, by Sascha Schneider (1895)
However, statues of Jesus on the cross with bulging biceps and pecs definitely miss the mark.
As someone who travelled on foot and ate very little, it would be extremely surprising if Jesus was particularly muscular.
When we see paintings of Jesus today, he is often wearing a long white robe which hangs down to his ankles.
However, in first-century Judea, long robes like these would have been seen as women’s clothing.
Instead, men from the region would have worn a short woollen tunic made up of two pieces, belted or tied at the waist, with a thinner linen tunic underneath.
Only Roman citizens were permitted to wear a toga but Jesus would have had a thick woollen mantle called a himation to wrap about himself for warmth.
As a Jewish man, Jesus’ mantle might have had knotted tassels called tzitzit on each of the corners.
Jesus would have worn a knee-length tunic tied or belted at the waist with a thick woollen mantle or cloak called a himation over the top (pictured)
These sandals were found in the caves around the Dead Sea and date back to the first century. They are exactly the kind of simple footwear Jesus would have worn
However, this wouldn’t have been entirely unique since lots of clothes from the period also had fringes.
The one thing that our modern images of Jesus get right is that everyone in Judea would have worn leather sandals during the time Jesus was alive.
Archaeologists have even found examples of first-century sandles in the caves Dead Sea and Masada.
These show that Jesus’ sandals would have been very simple, with the soles made of thick pieces of leather sewn together, and the upper parts made of straps of leather going through the toes.
When it comes to colour, images of Jesus often show him wearing a red or blue mantle over his white robes.
Archaeological evidence from the time shows that people did wear brightly coloured and patterned clothes – but it is more likely that Jesus’ clothes would have been a little more muted.
‘Many garments were dyed bright colours, but it was considered more manly to wear duller hues or undyed clothing,’ says Professor Taylor.
‘Appearance and clothing do matter, and Jesus was quite clear about that: he asked those he sent out in his name to wear only one tunic and a pair of sandals, with no money, just like refugees might arrive in a village needing support with nothing on them. He would then have dressed very simply himself.’
