Talk:Joseph of Arimathea

Given that there are historically extant legends of Joseph of Arimathea and Jesus visiting Britain, #and# the Holy Grail being associated with the Arthurian legend, but no equivalents from past times of Jesus being in France it is more plausible that the former than the latter monarchy is descended from Jesus. 212.85.6.26 (talk) 18:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

You realize that that aspect of Arthurian legend is from France, right? Omar (gibber) 18:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, that the legends of the grail pre-date the legends of Joseph of Arimathea's presence in France? Omar (gibber) 18:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

This is paraphrasing many stories: The Arthurian legends (with Arthur being a composite of memories and stories associated with actually existing 'post-Roman period Britain) has become associated with Britain; there are the JofA and Jesus visiting Glastonbury legends (Jesus supposedly visited India and Glastonbury - does this make him the first hippy?). There is thus more of a by Edward I and a certain unsavoury author), and 'Arthur of the legends' seems to have been based on a number of actual historical persons in the British Isles); JofA is claimed to have come to Britain with Jesus, and Edward I and the monks were involved in 'rediscovering' the remains of Arthur and Guinnevere. The English monarchs long claimed to be Kings of France.

There is thus (using the 'logic of grand historical conspiracies') a stronger case for Lizzy being the heir to Jesus than some supposed French claimant. 82.198.250.70 (talk) 16:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)