Jesus... British bloodline?

Question

There is that theory that Jesus was part English. Can you elaborate (or disagree) on that? ALSO PLEASE state your sourves for the people who claim HE IS part British. Websites more favorable, but other sources welcome.

Answer 1

After the natives of Britain converted to Christianity, they sought links connecting themselves to the life of Jesus and the Holy Family, including Joseph of Arimathea, who, according to legend, was the brother of Jesus' mother, Mary.

The New Testament supplies the information that Joseph was secretly a disciple of Jesus as well as the owner of the tomb in which Jesus was lain before his Resurrection.  However, it wasn't until the 9th century CE that links to Joseph appeared in the "Life of Mary Magdalene", a tale that sends Joseph to Britain accompanied by (among others) Mary, Martha, Lazarus, and Mary Magdalene.  By the 12th century, the legend had grown, and the Arthurian Cycle made Joseph  the keeper of the Holy Grail (not as Dan Brown would tell it, Mary Magdalene, but the drinking cup that held the wine at the Last Supper).  Somewhere along the way, legends also suggested that Jesus prior to his three-year ministry accompanied his wealthy uncle to Cornwall, where Joseph was a tin merchant.  William Blake's soaring hymn, "Jerusalem", plays upon this idea.

Of course, Anglo-Saxon tales also note that the mother of the Emperor Constantine, Helen (or Elaine), was a native of England.  In "Elene", she travels to the Holy Land to bring back the true cross.  Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.

Answer 2

During his Gallic Wars, Julius Caesar invaded Britain twice, in 55 and 54 BC.  So this clearly shows that Britain did exist prior to Jesus' birth.  

However, his mother was Mary and according to other sources "Mary (Judeo-Aramaic: מרים, Maryām, from Hebrew Miriam, Greek Μαριαμ or Μαρια, in Arabic مريم Maryam, Syriac: ܡܪܝܡ), and called since medieval times Madonna (My Lady), resident in Nazareth in Galilee, is known from the New Testament[1] as the mother of Jesus of Nazareth. The New Testament describes her as a young maiden – traditionally, Greek parthénos signifies an actual virgin[2] – who conceived by the agency of the Holy Spirit whilst she was already the betrothed wife of Joseph of the House of David and awaiting their imminent formal home-taking ceremony (the concluding Jewish wedding rite).

Christians generally maintain that she was a virgin at the point of conception and at least until the birth of Jesus. The Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox Churches and some Protestant denominations also maintain that Mary remained a virgin throughout the rest of her life.[3][4][5]

The New Testament recounts her presence at important stages during her son's adult life (e.g., at the Wedding at Cana and at his crucifixion). Also, she was present at communal prayers immediately after Jesus' Ascension.

Narratives of her life are further elaborated in later Christian apocrypha, who give the names of her parents as Joachim and Anne."

Most of what we know of Mary is apocryphal.  We do know that the Christian Bible states that she was a relative of Elizabeth, wife of the priest Zechariah of the priestly division of Abijah, who herself was of the lineage of Aaron and so of the tribe of Levi. Some people believe that Mary, just like Joseph (her betrothed at the time of her pregnancy), was of the House of David and so of the tribe of Judah, and that the genealogy presented in Luke was hers, while Joseph's is given in Matthew

There is nothing in either the Christian Bible or recognized apocraphyl texts to suggest that Mary was of British ancestry.  On the contrary, everything leads to her Jewish ancestry.  The Bible does not tell us when or where Mary died. Church tradition records that John, her adopted son, took her with him to Ephesus and she was buried there.

You may be thinking of the legend of Mary Magdalene going to Britain after Jesus' death.  Supposedly her tomb was located, but a scientific team made up of both genetic specialists, secular historians, and professional genealogists as well as Hebraic scientists have since raised some serious questions on this issue.  The figure of Mary Magdalene is often associated with the search for the Holy Grail, itself likely part fiction/legend.

I've listed some sources for further research, but everyone seems to have their own opinion, not all of them grounded in actual verifiable documentation.

Since the Da Vinci Code has been thoroughly debunked, by all but hardline conspiracy theorists, as a work of fiction I would take any Dan Brown-like references that purport to have the "answer" to the Mary or Mary Magdalene question with a big fat grain of salt.

Answer 3

The documentation in any famiy tree that goes back that far will probably not meet professional genealogical standards.  Most of the Hebrews records were oral tradition. A lot of documents have been destroyed.  

Actually, most people are doing good to get back to the 1600s.  Now, if you tie into a royal or noble line somewhere it might take you back to the first melennium.

You have to understand the Hebrews did not have surnames.  In Europe most people didn't have one until the last melennium.  In England they had one by the 14th century and still it was a couple of more centuries when in all cases the same surname was passed down from father to son.  

Surnames were based on a) being the son of some b) their occupation c) where they lived d) some characteristic about them.

When they got through, it wasn't impossible for legitimate sons of the same man to have a different surname and still they each could have shared their surname with others with whom they were not related. That in itself makes it very difficult to trace back any further.

Also there are a lot of people who do not know the difference between a history book and a historical novel. Some people will read historical novels and think everything is fact.