According to biblical accounts, the burial place of Jesus was a tomb hewn from rock, located within a garden close to the crucifixion site.

For almost 1,700 years, Christians have held the belief that this sacred tomb resides within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem.

This revered site was first consecrated as a church by Roman Emperor Constantine in the fourth century. Since its establishment, countless pilgrims have journeyed there, seeking to worship at the spot where Christ is said to have been crucified, interred, and risen.

Recent archaeological excavations conducted beneath the church have provided new insights, revealing an ancient landscape that closely mirrors the description found in the Gospel of John.

Lead archaeologist Francesca Romana Stasolla shared with the Daily Mail: “We have uncovered signs of a funerary setting, as well as small plots cultivated with vines and olive trees, alongside a pastoral landscape marked by occasional human activity.”

The excavations show that the church stands over an abandoned quarry outside ancient Jerusalem where cultivated plots and multiple rock-cut tombs existed side by side.

That combination closely mirrors John’s description of a garden containing a tomb near the place where Jesus was crucified.

Although no physical evidence identifies the tomb’s occupant, the parallels keep alive the possibility that early Christians preserved the true location of Jesus’ burial.

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre attracts an estimated four million visitors each year.

The original church was dedicated in AD 335 after Roman buildings at the site, traditionally described as a temple to the goddess Venus, were demolished.

During the work, builders uncovered a rock-cut chamber that was identified as the burial place of Jesus, who had died nearly 300 years earlier.

Emperor Constantine’s workers focused on one particular tomb that was already being venerated as Christ’s burial place, excavating around it to separate it from the surrounding graves. 

The second church at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which stands today, was built and restored starting around 614 to 626 AD, following the destruction and fire caused by the Persian Sassanid invasion.

The discoveries add to the ongoing debate over the location of Jesus’ burial.

Many scholars support the Church of the Holy Sepulchre as the site, citing the presence of rock-cut tombs from the first century.

Others argue that the Garden Tomb, another ancient burial site in Jerusalem, better matches biblical descriptions.

The latest findings are detailed in a new 98-page preliminary report published in Liber Annuus, the archaeological journal of Jerusalem’s Studium Biblicum Franciscanum. 

The report brings together results from the final 2025 excavation campaign, completing a project that began during a major restoration of the church’s floor in March 2022.

Evidence of the ancient garden was first announced in 2025, but completed excavations have now allowed researchers to reconstruct how the cultivated land, abandoned quarry and burial chambers fitted together across the wider site.

The report revealed that the landscape began as a vast stone quarry cut into the side of a hill outside Jerusalem’s ancient walls, with some sections reaching nearly 20 feet beneath the church’s present floor.

As stone extraction gradually ended, the deepest areas were filled with soil and divided by low dry-stone walls, creating small plots that could be cultivated.

‘Evidence of cultivation is provided by archaeobotanical and pollen remains, which have enabled us to reconstruct a landscape suitable for pastoralism, with natural vegetation used for grazing,’ Stasolla said.

‘This type of Mediterranean landscape was widespread throughout the region and coexisted with the abandoned quarry area and the presence of rock-cut tombs.’

Researchers dated the cultivated landscape through its position within the archaeological layers and pottery recovered from the quarry fills.

The evidence places it after the quarry was abandoned but before Emperor Hadrian rebuilt the area in the second century AD, a broad period encompassing the lifetime of Jesus.

However, the plant remains have not been given an absolute laboratory date, meaning archaeologists cannot prove the garden was being cultivated at the precise time of Christ’s crucifixion.

Archaeologists also recovered traces of fruits, legumes and wild vegetation, revealing an open Mediterranean landscape that was cultivated, visited and used for grazing but not permanently inhabited.

At the same time, exposed rock faces left behind by the quarry provided ideal locations for burial chambers to be carved directly into the stone.

Researchers found multiple tombs opening into the same former quarry at different heights, connected by narrow paths winding between the graves and cultivated plots.

The result was a complex landscape where gardens, grazing land and rock-cut tombs existed together, just as the Gospel of John places a garden and burial chamber beside the site of Jesus’ crucifixion.

John 19:41 reads: ‘Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.’

The garden reference is one of several clues contained in the Bible.

John 19:20 places the crucifixion close to Jerusalem, while Hebrews 13:12 says Jesus suffered outside the city gate. Archaeologists found that the quarry stood outside Jerusalem’s walls at the time of Jesus but remained close to the city, matching both descriptions.

Matthew, Mark and Luke each describe Jesus’ grave as having been carved from rock. The excavations confirmed that the gardenlike landscape was also a genuine ancient burial ground containing multiple chambers cut directly into the quarry’s exposed stone.

John also states that the tomb was close to the crucifixion site, allowing Jesus to be buried quickly before the Jewish Sabbath began. 

At the Holy Sepulchre, the chamber traditionally identified as his tomb and the rock of Calvary exist within the same compact area.

None of those features was unique in ancient Jerusalem, as abandoned quarries were commonly reused for cultivation and burials. 

What makes the Holy Sepulchre compelling is the convergence of all the clues in one place: outside the ancient walls but close to the city, with cultivated land, a rocky crucifixion site and a cemetery containing rock-cut tombs.

Within that burial ground, one particular chamber would eventually become the focus of centuries of Christian veneration.

A Roman structure erected during Emperor Hadrian’s reign in the second century stood directly against the tomb, making it inaccessible, while also cutting into the nearby rock of Calvary, the traditional site of Jesus’ crucifixion.

The report suggested the surviving Roman walls may have belonged to a smaller cult site rather than the massive pagan temple described in traditional accounts.

Roughly two centuries later, Constantine’s workers demolished the Roman structure and excavated the same location to expose the venerated tomb.

They removed the surrounding rock, separated the chamber from the other graves and constructed the first Christian shrine around it.

Its position was considered so important that architects allowed different sections of the enormous church complex to fall out of alignment rather than move the tomb.

The first monument was probably open to the sky and consisted of a small circular shrine surrounded by 12 columns, allowing early pilgrims to gather around the burial chamber.

Although none of this proves Jesus was buried inside, the decision to return to and preserve one specific tomb centuries later raises the possibility that knowledge of its location survived through generations of early Christians.

Stasolla said: ‘The archaeological area beneath the Church of the Holy Sepulchre reveals the long history of a part of Jerusalem that, in the early fourth century AD, underwent the monumentalization of Christological memory.

‘In this case, I believe that the archaeological evidence should be used primarily to understand the places and contexts in which Christian memory took shape and became firmly established.’

The evidence shows that Christians were commemorating this particular location by the fourth century, but it cannot confirm that Jesus had been buried there three centuries earlier.

Important gaps remain, as no inscription identifies Jesus, and it cannot be definitively proven that the chamber was new, nor that it had been used or belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, as the Gospels state.

The Bible says that Joseph of Arimathea, a wealthy member of the Jewish council, asked Pontius Pilate for the body of Jesus after the crucifixion, wrapping it in clean linen and placing it in his own unused rock-hewn tomb.

The discoveries therefore do not confirm the biblical account, but they demonstrate that the traditional site contains the principal geographical and physical features described in the New Testament.

‘The Church of the Holy Sepulchre gives monumental form to the sites where, since very early times, tradition has located the memory of Christ’s death and resurrection,’ Stasolla said.

‘Archaeology undoubtedly attests to the enduring nature of this commemorative tradition.’

Live Updates

The behavior of a spectator in the Lindsay Clancy trial has drawn widespread attention after a video surfaced, showing a woman appearing to grin and wink at a camera capturing the courtroom proceedings.

As the trial session came to a close, the camera focused on the spectators. When asked to stand, a woman in a green dress seemed to smile and wink just as the camera moved away.

The individual in question seems to be Brittany Romano, a journalist based in New York City. According to her professional website, Romano contributes to publications like “Elle,” “Cosmopolitan,” and “Teen Vogue.”

Romano has been following the trial, posting on her various social media profiles about the case.

Lindsay Clancy is the Massachusetts mother currently on trial for murder for the 2023 strangling deaths of her three young children inside the family’s Duxbury home.

LINDSAY CLANCY’S PARENTS GET MASSIVE GLOBAL DONOR SUPPORT AS FUNDRAISER SURPASSES $830K

RELATED: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Form New Friendship with Geri Halliwell and F1’s Christian Horner

She doesn’t deny the charges, and her defense argues she is not “criminally responsible” because she was suffering from undiagnosed postpartum psychosis at the time of the killings.

As for Romano, she recently posed for a “selfie” with Clancy’s Attorney Kevin Reddington last week and posted it on X.

In a video posted to social media following the Monday proceedings, someone appears to ask Romano why she was reportedly smiling on the livestream, to which she responded and said, “I was laughing because I grew up with Lindsay,” she says.

Following her new social media fame, Romano has defended her actions and wrote in a post: “I’m actually proud of myself because these trolls have been absolutely vile,” the now-deleted post said in part.

News Media has reached out to the court and Romano for comment.

Could this be just coach speak?

Klint Kubiak appears to leverage the Raiders’ fluid quarterback situation to deliver a broader message to his team: complacency is not an option. The implication is clear—positions aren’t gifts; they’re prizes to be fought for.

There’s also a chance that Kubiak genuinely sees potential in rookie Fernando Mendoza to surpass Kirk Cousins and claim the title of starting quarterback for the Raiders.

Alternatively, Kubiak’s hesitation to declare a starting QB might be an implicit challenge for Mendoza: continue striving, continue competing. The opportunity remains open, and seizing it is entirely within reach.

If that’s the case, Mendoza is on the clock with about a week to make his mark and stake his claim.

“We got another week. I don’t want anyone to be comfortable in their job,” Kubiak said after the Raiders’ preseason win over the Texans. “It should always be that way for all positions. So, let’s keep going.”

The comment was not exactly a declaration that Mendoza is breathing down Cousins’ neck. The Raiders have been careful throughout the offseason to avoid putting that kind of pressure on the rookie.

From Tom Brady to general manager John Spytek, the organization has consistently made it clear that it does not want to rush Mendoza. Cousins was brought in to provide precisely that protection, a proven veteran capable of running Kubiak’s offense while Mendoza adjusts to the speed, complexity and pressure of the NFL.

That remains the most logical plan.

But until Kubiak officially names Cousins the starter, Mendoza has an opportunity. However narrow it might be, the door remains open.

The question is what Mendoza can do over the next week to force Kubiak to keep it that way, or perhaps open it even wider.

It starts with avoiding the type of mistake he made against the Texans.

Mendoza’s 80-yard pick-six was the quintessential rookie error. One play after Mike Washington Jr. ripped off a 33-yard run, Mendoza tried to go right back to him through the air. The decision itself was defensible. The throw was not.

Mendoza delivered the ball behind Washington and directly into the arms of Texans linebacker Wade Woodaz, who returned it for a touchdown.

That single play will not define Mendoza’s preseason. Nor should it. Rookie quarterbacks make those mistakes – and, for that matter, so do some of the greatest quarterbacks ever.

Matthew Stafford has thrown 32 pick-sixes, tied with Brett Favre for the most in NFL history. Dan Marino threw 29, while Drew Brees and Peyton Manning each threw 27.

READ MORE: North West Defies Celebrity Stereotype, Aspires for “Regular Job” at Popular Chain

That is Hall of Fame company and a reminder that even greatness comes with the occasional disastrous decision. Mendoza will certainly throw more pick-sixes before his career is over. Better to experience his first one – and learn from it – in August rather than October.

But if Mendoza is going to close the gap on Cousins, he must show that he learned from it immediately.

What Mendoza needs to do

To close that gap, that means protecting the football, understanding where the danger is coming from and knowing when a play is over. The spectacular throws will come eventually. Right now, Kubiak needs to see whether Mendoza can consistently make the routine ones—and whether he can prevent one bad decision from undoing an otherwise productive drive.

Mendoza must also show greater command before the snap.

Can he get the Raiders in and out of the huddle cleanly? Can he recognize pressure, adjust protections and identify where the favorable matchup will be? Can he play on time rather than waiting for receivers to come open?

Those details rarely generate highlights, but they are often what separate the quarterback a coach trusts from the quarterback he is still developing.

Mendoza also has to demonstrate that he can move the offense when the first read disappears.

He has already flashed the ability to work through progressions and find secondary options. The next step is doing it more consistently and against increasingly complicated defensive looks. Kubiak needs to see Mendoza process quickly without rushing—and remain aggressive without becoming reckless.

Most importantly, Mendoza must make the Raiders believe the offense belongs to him.

That does not require a dramatic speech or an exaggerated display of leadership. Command reveals itself in smaller ways: how teammates respond to him in the huddle, how quickly the offense resets after a mistake and whether everyone appears more confident when he is directing traffic.

Cousins has spent more than a decade developing that presence. Mendoza cannot manufacture it in one week, but he can show that he is further along than expected.

None of this means Mendoza must be perfect in the preseason finale. In fact, chasing perfection might be the quickest way to tighten up and regress. He simply needs to look like the same quarterback from one practice and one series to the next.

If he protects the ball, plays on time, handles pressure and consistently leads scoring drives, he can make Kubiak’s decision more difficult.

Cousins still has the advantage. His experience, command and understanding of NFL defenses make him the safer choice for a rebuilding team that does not want to sacrifice its young quarterback’s long-term development for short-term curiosity.

But if his message to Mendoza is genuine – that there remains a path to the starting job – the rookie’s assignment is clear.

Keep pushing. Protect the football. Command the offense. Make the routine plays look routine.

And then force Kubiak to make a decision he may not have expected to be quite so difficult.

In a significant testimony during Lindsay Clancy’s trial, a forensic psychologist shared his belief that Clancy was fully aware of her actions when she took the lives of her children.

Offering his expert opinion for the prosecution, Dr. Kirk Heilbrun affirmed to the court that Clancy should be held criminally responsible for her deeds.

Now standing trial, 36-year-old Clancy faces charges for the tragic murders of her three children—Cora, aged five, Dawson, who was three, and Callan, just eight months old—committed at their Duxbury, Massachusetts home in 2023.

The devastating events unfolded as she used exercise bands to strangle the children, after which she reportedly attempted to end her own life. Her suicide attempt was unsuccessful, resulting in paralysis and confining her to a wheelchair permanently.

While Clancy has confessed to the killings, she pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, attributing her actions to postpartum psychosis. Her defense seeks her placement in a state mental health facility over serving time in prison.

Dr Heilbrun, who interviewed Clancy in April this year and has spent 180 hours working on the case, believes that she was suffering from a mental defect of bipolar disorder and sleep problems during the tragic incident, not psychosis.

But he said that she retained an awareness of the illegality including of killing her children.

She was aware of the illegality and moral wrongfulness of what she was doing, he testified.

This was a serious suicide attempt and altruistic filicide rather than psychosis, in his opinion.

‘Although this depression and hopelessness influenced her decision, she retained control over when, where and how she carried it out,’ he testified.

It is his opinion that she was criminally responsible on January 24, 2023.

Dr Heilbrun testified to several reasons that he did not believe she was psychotic.

She said she was ‘horrified’ when she woke up in the hospital – something he said shows she was thinking about what happened.

There were also inconsistencies in her statements about the voice, he said.

He said that in the days after the killings she said that the voice told her it was her ‘last chance’ and also that the children would suffer without her. She later said the voice did not tell her the children would suffer without her.

He also said that it would be ‘very unusual’ for her to be able to have the phone call with her husband, Patrick Clancy, in the middle of a psychotic episode. Patrick had called her from CVS when he went to pick up children’s medicine.

Heilbrun also suggested that Clancy was experiencing peritraumatic dissociation – where someone goes through a traumatic set of circumstances and so it feels like things are unreal.

‘You feel as though you’re watching yourself,’ he explained.

The expert testified that it can sound psychotic because someone can feel as though they lack decision-making but it is more about going through a traumatic set of circumstances.

Her strangling her children could be an example of that because that was very traumatic for her, he said.

During the strangulation, he said that Clancy made several decisions.

‘Why the basement? Who of the children goes first? What do you say to the children to keep them from panicking?’ he said.

Dr Heilbrun testified that where the children were killed, how they were strangled, what to use, the order with which to kill them, and the way to try to kill herself were all decisions she made.

‘She was going through what she called, “no thinking, no decision-making, only responding to the voice,”‘ Heilbrun said.

‘There are just many ongoing decisions that have to be made to accomplish a killing like this in just 18 minutes.’

On Monday, Heilbrun also said that the phrase Clancy said to her children when she killed them also points to altruistic filicide.

Altruistic filicide is the killing of one’s children out of love, when the disturbed mind believes that they would be better off dead.

Clancy said to her children as she strangled them, ‘Go to God, baby,’ according to Heilbrun.

He said that was part of her expectation that she and the youngsters would be together in heaven.

‘She was raised as a Catholic and this as I understand Catholic considerations that’s not necessarily what happens,’ Heilbrun said.

‘But when I ask her about that, when I said, “Isn’t suicide a mortal sin?”‘ he continued before Reddington’s objection.

That remark led Reddington to file for a mistrial, which the judge rejected but struck the comment from the record.

If you or someone you know needs help, please call or text the confidential 24/7 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline in the US on 988. There is also an online chat available at 988lifeline.org.