The name was as common then as it is now. That said, it is still fascinating none the less at the possibility.
Either way, it does nothing for the advancement of biblical archeology because of the uncertainty of its original occupant. IMO of course.
Actually, there's nothing all that interesting to me in supposing, "Gee, what if a pathetic fraud, wrapped in a cheap lie, and released by virulently anti-clerical news media might be true!"
Face it: The media got all excited because they thought they had a chance to rub Catholicism's nose in it. End of story.