Jesus is one of the most recognizable figures in Western culture, but according to experts, our modern depiction of him is quite far from reality.
Since photography didn’t exist in 27 to 29 AD, there are no actual images of Jesus from his lifetime. That has left historians piecing together what he likely looked like, and evidence suggests he would have resembled most other Judean men of that era.
As someone from Judea, in what is now modern-day Palestine, Jesus would have had darker skin and his hair was more likely to be black and curly rather than brown and straight.
In keeping with first-century AD grooming habits, he likely had a beard, but it would have been trimmed rather than long and unkempt.
“Jesus was actually accused of drinking too much, so he was not keeping such a vow.”
Interestingly, some of the earliest artistic representations of Jesus show him with short, well-groomed hair and a neatly trimmed beard, rather than the long, flowing locks we often see today.
However, historians caution that these depictions tell us more about the artistic and cultural styles of the time than they do about Jesus’ actual appearance.
Professor Taylor noted that in the first century AD, men with long hair were often viewed as looking unkempt or out of place.
Dr. Meredith Warren, a senior lecturer in Biblical and religious studies at Sheffield University, told the news outlet that artists may have intentionally altered Jesus’ image to align him with powerful Roman gods like Apollo and Zeus, reinforcing his divine and authoritative status.
Dr. Warren also suggested that, in reality, Jesus likely had brown skin and brown eyes, matching the appearance of the local population. Given that he lived a physically active lifestyle and spent long hours outdoors, he likely had noticeable facial lines, a sign of frequent sun exposure and a hard-working existence.
These clues imply that Jesus wasn’t particularly distinctive in his appearance compared to other Judean men of his time.
One surprising detail, however, is that the lean and fit physique often depicted in artwork may not be far from the truth. Historians suggest that, despite artistic exaggerations, Jesus likely had a well-conditioned body due to his active lifestyle.
While he may have had toned abdominal muscles, the muscular arms and exaggerated physique often seen in modern depictions likely stem from an idealized, divine representation of him rather than historical accuracy.
Professor Taylor added: “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.”
