Mary Magdalena in France

Jorma Jormakka
jorma.o.jormakka@gmail.com

Abstract: The legend of Mary Magdalena arriving to France was popularized in the book The Holy
Blood, the Holy Grail and later by Dan Brown's novel. The legend is very old and there may be
some truth in it, so I looked briefly at the issue.

The Golden Legend, a 13th century text on the life of saints by Jacobus de Voragine, starts the
legend of Mary Magdalena in the following way:

"Mary Magdalene had her surname of Magdalo, a castle, and was born of right noble lineage and
parents, which were descended of the lineage of kings. And her father was named Cyrus, and her
mother Eucharis. She with her brother Lazarus, and her sister Martha, possessed the castle of
Magdalo, which is two miles from Nazareth, and Bethany, the castle which is nigh to Jerusalem,
and also a great part of Jerusalem, which, all these things they departed among them. In such wise1
that Mary had the castle Magdalo, whereof she had her name Magdalene. And Lazarus had the part
of the city of Jerusalem, and Martha had to her part Bethany. And when Mary gave herself to all
delights of the body, and Lazarus entended all to knighthood, Martha, which was wise, governed
nobly her brother's part and also her sister's, and also her own, and administered to knights, and her
servants, and to poor men, such necessities as they needed. "

There was no castle named Magdalo night to Jerusalem, but there was a castle in Jerusalem with a
tower (migdal=magdalo) named Mariamne. The tower in the king's castle was built by Herod the
Great for his belowed second wife Mariamne I after Herod had excecuted her in 29 BC. The next
"owner" of the tower was Mariamne II Boethus, the third wife of Herod. This Mariamne was
originally not of noble lineage, or at least not noble enough for Herod to marry her before making
his father Simon Boethus from Alexandria the High Priest in Jerusalem, but she become royal by
marrying Herod. Mariamne II had a brother named Eleazar (Lazarus) and in 70 AD the richest
woman in Jerusalem was Martha Boethus, possibly a sister of Mariamne II at the age of over 80.

First we estimate when Mariamne II was born. Herod the Great and Mariamne I were wedded in 37
BC. They had two sons: Alexandros and Aristobulus. Aristobulus is said to have been born 31 BC,
and he was executed by Herod the Great in 7 BC, thus, at the age of 24. Alexandros and Aristobulus
were raised in Rome and returned to Jerusalem in 12 BC. Herod the Great was alarmed by their
popularity among the people: they were Hasmonean princes while Herod was Idumean, and also by
their behavior. When and why Herod the Great decided to make Simon ben Boethus the High
Priest? The position of the High Priest traditionally belonged to Hasmonean kings and princes. In
37 BC Herod the Great defeated and executed Antigonus Mattathias and the position of the High
Priest, as that of the king, become vacant: Herod the Great become the king. In 37 BC Herod the
Great appointed Ananelus to the position of High Priest, but in 36 BC Herod had to give this
position to Mariamne I's brother, Aristobulus, because this position traditionally belonged to
Hasmonean kings and princes. Herod drowned Aristobulus in 35 BC and again made Ananelus the
Hight Priest. After Ananelus the High Priest was Jesus ben Fabus, and then Herod the Great
replaced Jesus ben Fabus by Simon ben Boethus in order to marry Mariamne II.

The claim in the Wikipedia (i.e., according to accepted history) is that Jesus ben Fabus was High
Priest in the years 30-23 BC and Simon ben Boethus in the years 23-4 BC, yet the Wikipedia also
claims that Herod II, the son of Mariamne II with Herod the Great, was born c. 27 BC. This seems
to be a confusion as Herod II most probably was born after the wedding.
The High Priest position belonged to Alexandros and Aristobulus, sons of Herod the Great. The
boys were in Rome growing up and the position had to be filled for some time by Ananelus and
Jesus ben Fabus. It is not known when Jesus ben Fabus replaced Ananelus and there was very little
reason for replacing Ananelus in 30 BC (unless he died). Herod had no need to deprive
Alexsandros and Aristobulus of their right to the office before the brothers returned to Jerusalem
and Herod started to suspect them of plotting against their father. Thus, Simon ben Boethus most
probably was not made the High Priest before 12 BC, when the boys returned, and the wedding of
Mariamne II and Herod the Great was no eariier than in 11 BC. If so, Jesus ben Fabus was High
Priest in the years 23-12 BC and Ananelus in the years 35-23 BC, which seems somewhat more
reasonable. History does not know the year when Jesus ben Fabus become High Priest, nor when he
left the office, nor when Herod the Great married Mariamne II.

Mariamne Ii most probably was very young, not older than 15 years when she was wedded to Herod
the Great. Thus, she was born about 26 BC. If so, then in the year 33 AD when Jesus was crucified.
Mariamne II was 58 years old. She could be Maria Magdalena of the gospels. Nothing in the
gospels suggests that Maria Magdalena was young, while Luke 8:3 suggests that she was rich and
the Golden Legend describes a noble woman associated with a tower in a castle. That fits only to
Mariamne II.

The trip to France that Maria Magdalena made according to the Provençal Tradition took place soon
after the time after Herod I Agrippa excecuted James the Greater, son of Zebedee. Though the year
of this event is not mentioned in Acts or in the tradition, 41 or 42 AD is often suggested, but I date
the execution of James to 44 AD. If Mariamne II was born 26 BC, she was 69 years old in 44 AD.
She could have lived for thirty years spending most of this time in a cave close to Marseille, as the
Provençal Tradition says Magdalena did, 99 years is still not impossible. Some people in old times
lived as long as the oldest people today, only the average lifetime has increased, but let us notice
that the time from 41 AD to the year 70 AD, the year when the Jerusalem temple was destroyed, is
30 years in the Jewish calculation, and 41 AD is a common guess for the year when James died.
This seems to be the reason for the 30 years. Mariamne II could have lived for 99 years, as we all
may but very few do, but thirty years seems to be symbolic not literal.

It is possible that Maria Magdalena was Mariamne II. We start from this assumption, but first we
still make some checking if this assumption makes sense.

Aristobulus had four children: Mariamne III, Herod I Agrippa, Herodias and Herod of Chalcias.
Naturally, these names are throne names, Herod I Agrippa was originally Marcus Agrippa. Herod I
Agrippa was born 11 BC. Aristobulus was 20 years old at that time. We can estimate that Mariamne
III was born in 13 BC, Herodias in 9 BC and Herod of Chalcias in 8 BC. Herodias was two years
old in 7 BC when she was wedded to three years old Herod, son of Mariamne II. Herod and
Herodias had a daughter Salome. Salome is mentioned in the gospels of Mark and Matthew as
dansing to Herod Antipas when Jesus already had started his mission, the year could be 31 AD.
Whether the story is true or invented, it suggests that Salome was an adolescent, not older than c. 17
years old. If so, she should have been born 14 AD. Then Herod would have been 24 years old when
Salome was born and Herodias had 23 years. A man was typically becoming father at the age 19-24
years in tht culture in that time, while a woman was giving birth first time at the age 16-17 years, if
married. Thus, as Herodias was born c. 9 BC and married, she would have given birth at the year 8-
9 AD, provided that Herod II was old enough to be the father. As Salome was born c. 14 AD, Herod
II was old enough to be father not earlier than c. 13 BC and could not be born before 24-13=11 BC.
Herod II could be born in 10 BC and could have been three years old when he was married to
Herodias, daughter of Aristobulus, by Herod the Great. The claim in the Wikipedia that Herod II
was born c. 27 BC must be wrong.
There is another issue to check. Archelaus, the older son of Malthace, was older than Herod, son of
Mariamne II. When Antipater, the oldest son of Herod the Great, was executed for treason by Herod
the Great in 5 BC, Archelaus was in Rome and Josephus in War tells that he was still growing to be
a young man but was already thinking like a man. Though by an imprecise expression of time,
Josephus seems to imply that Archelaus was about 16 years old in 5 BC and born c. 21 BC.
Malthace was the fourth wife of Herod the Great and it may seem contradictory that the fourth wife
might have had sons with Herod the Great before Herod married his third wife, but this is not a
contradiction. Herod the Great most proably had concubines directly after he killed Mariamne I.
Malthace and other women could have been his unmarried wifes. The case of Mariamne II shows
that Herod the Great did not officially marry women who did not have a social position to be
queens. He had to give Mariamne II this position before the wedding. Many of his wifes did not
have such a position, thus Herod had not officially married them according to the Jewish law.
Josephus tells that Antipater, the oldest son of Herod, managed to get his mother Doris back to
Herod's bed after some time. Herod the Great may not have had other official wifes, only several
concubines, in this period. Herod probably married Malthace after he married Mariamne II because
he wanted his sons Archelaus and Antipas with Malthace to be egligible to the position of king or
ethnarch. After Herod the Great had made Simon ben Boethus the High Priest, he could officially
marry whom he wanted with minimal objections from Jewish priests.

Let us assume that Mary Magdalena was indeed Mariamne II.

With Mary Magdalena to France travelled also the mother of the sons of Zebedee according to the
Provençal Tradition. Let us identify this woman. Catholic tradition gives her as Mary Salome, but
this is not likely. Three of the four gospels give a partial list of women on the cross in crucifixion.
Comparing them and other information in the gospels, we get a different identification. The
reasoning is as follows:

The Catholic Church, the Golden legend, Jerome among others identify James the Less, James the
younger, James, son of Alphaeus with James the Just, the brother of Jesus. Alphaeus is a spelling of
Cleophas. Let us agree, this is logical. It follows that Mary Mary the wife of Cleopas in John 19:25
is Mary the mother of James the Younger and Joses in Mark 15:40.

Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55 tell that Jesus' mother was Mary and he had four brothers: James,
Joses, Juda and Simon and some sisters. "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of
James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were
offended at him." Mark 6:3. The Catholic interpretation is that Jesus' mother Mary in Mark 6:3 and
Matthew 13:55 is Virgin Mary, but in the same sentence the brothers of Jesus are sons of Mary, wife
of Clopas/Cleopas. it is very difficult to read the sentence in any other way than that Virgin Mary is
Mary, wife of Clopas.

John 19:25 gives four women: his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleopas, and Mary
Magdalena. Since Mary the wife of Clopas/Cleopas is Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus is not
Virgin Mary. Virgin Mary was a virgin when she got Jesus and later raised him as her son, but the
physical mother of Jesus was another woman. In a similar way, in John 1:45 Jesus is called son of
Joseph, but other places in gospels deny that Jesus was a physical son of Joseph. Analogically,
though Jesus is called son of Virgin Mary, it does not need to mean that Jesus was a physical son of
Virgin Mary. In fact, virgins do not give birth and prophecies had to be fulfilled one way or another.
The prophecy Isaish 7:13 literally says"See, a virgin becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son".
Notice "See", meaning that this was seen/seemed to be the case.

The sign on the cross, written by Pilate stated that Jesus was the king of Jews. There is no reason to
assume Pilate made a mistake: Jesus was a Hasmonean prince. Jesus' mother must have been a
Hasmonean princess. Because Jesus was about 30 years when John the Baptist was in prison (Luke
3:23 and John the Baptist started in the 15th year of Tiberius (Luke 3:1-2), i.e., in 29 AD, Jesus was
born around 0 AD. There is only one Hasmonean princess who could be his mother around this
year: Mariamne III. Her name is luckily Mary: Matthew and Luke tells that Mary gave birth to
Jesus. Therefore, according to tradition, the name of the real mother of Jesus was Mary. The
Provençal Tradition says that there were three Marys. Two are Mary Magdalena and Virgin Mary.
The third can be the real mother of Jesus instead of Mary Salome, who strangely enough had a
sister also named Mary.

If Mariamne III was the mother of Jesus, then his father was Archelaus, Samaritan from his
mother's side. John 4:43-44 confirms that Jesus' father was Samaritan: Jesus has been in Samaria
(and was not driven away as in Luke 4:49) but people do not believe him. Then he says that a
prophet is never accepted on his father's land. After this statement Jesus wants to go to Galilee. In
canonical gospels in the corresponding place Marc 6:1 and Matthew 13:53 Jesus is in his hometown
when he says that a prophet is not accepted in his home town. Neither place mentions that the
hometown was Nazareth. Indeed, Matthew 2:23 says that Jesus settled in Nazareth to be called
Nazarean, but was not born there, so Nazareth need not be his home town. John has another place
that suggests that Jesus' father was Samaritan. In John 8:48 Pharisees ask if they are not correct in
saying that Jesus is Samaritan and obsessed by an evil spirit. Jesus only denies being obsessed by an
evil spirit.

By John 19:25 the mother of Jesus had a sister. If the mother of Jesus was named Mary (Miriam or
Mariamne), then her sister's name hardly could have been Mary. The list of women on the cross in
Mark 15:40 is Mary Magdalena, Mary, the mother of James the Younger and Joses, and Salome.
This is: Magdalena, Virgin Mary and Salome. From this list we can identify Salome as the name of
the sister of the mother of Jesus. We have now Mary and her sister Salome. Mariamne III had a
sister Herodias but Herodias is a throne name. The real name of Herodias is not known but it very
possibly was Salome as her daughter was Salome and both Mariamne and Salome are typical names
for Hasmoneans and Herodians.

In Matthew 27:56 the list of women on the cross is Mary Magdalena, Mary, the mother of James
and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee. Though it would be logical that the list in
Matthew 27:56 names the same women as the list in Mark 15:40, this need not be so: the last
woman in the list of Matthew can be either the real mother of Jesus or the sister of the real mother
of Jesus: John names four women.

James, son of Zebedee, has been traditionally called James the Greater. This name is not used in the
gospels, but James the Lesser is used in gospels, making James, son of Zebedee, James the Greater
also in gospels. As he was greater than James the Just, he hardly was born out of marriage: he must
have been of royal birth. We have only two possible Hasmonean princesses who could be the
mother of James the Greater: Mariamne III and her sister Herodias.

If the mother of the sons of Zebedee was Herodias, Zebedee was not Herod Antipas as it would
make James and John too young. It follows that Zebedee should be Herod II, the son of Mariamne
II. But Herod II is called Philip in the gospels and that likely was his birth name as Herod is a
throne name. The real name of Herod II was Philip, not Zebedee. It follows that the mother of the
sons of Zebedee was not Herodias. Therefore she was Mariamne III and the father was Archelaus.
This implies that the real name of Archelaus was Zebedee. Can Zebedee be Archelaus? By character
Archelaus would suit the be the Thunder in the name Boanerges, Sons of Thunder, that Jesus gave
to John and James (Mark 3:17).
Herod the Great had two sons with Malthace, Archelaus and Antipas. The name of Antipas is a
variant of the name Antipater. The name Antipater does not mean against the father, nobody would
name a son like that. Like anti- in antipasta, it means replacing the father. Antipater was the name of
Herod's father, no mystery there. But Archelaus means ruler of people. It was the name of a general
of Alexander the Great who tried to keep Alexander's empire together after Alexander's death. That
was the task of Archelaus after Herod the Great died. Archelaus failed. Archelaus must be a throne
name. We do not know what his real name was, it may have been e.g. Zebadiah.

Let us reflect a bit on who travelled to France. According to the Provençal Tradition the participants
were: Mary Magdalena, Lazarus, Martha, Mary Jacobe, Mary Salome, Maximin, one of the seventy
two disciples of Christ, Cedonius, the blind man who was healed by Jesus, Marcelle, Martha's
servant, and Sara, maid of the two Marys.

We can remove some names. There was a 4th century bishop called Lazarus in this area in France.
His relicts may have created the legend that Lazarus travelled with Magdalena and was the first
bishop in France. It is unlikely Martha Boethus left for France as she was in Jerusalem in 70 AD.
Maximin was not originally connected with Mary Magdalena in the tradition. He was one of the
early bishops in France, but later than the seventy two disciples. Mary Jacobe is Mary, wife of
Clopas, i.e., Virgin Mary. Acts and tradition tell that Virgin Mary did not leave Palestine in 44 AD.
Mary Salome was not Mary: she was Salome called Herodias. Herodias did sail to France in 39 AD
with her husband Antipas. The Golden Legend does not mention Sara. Saint Sara become the saint
of gypsies and seems to be a later development of the legend. Nothing is known of Marcelle and
Cedonius. Probably there were some servants traveling with their noble masters.

But it is quite possibly that Mariamne II and Mariamne III did sail to France some time in the year
44 AD and that they landed to Saintes-Maires-de-la-Mer. They may have had remains of Mariamne
III's son James the Greater with them and this is the way the relicts that now are in Santiage de
Compostela may have come to Europe. Mariamne II may even have lived in a cave at or close to St.
Maxim in-la-Sainte-Baume. Interestingly, the remains of James lacked the head and Portuguese
Bishop Mauricio Burdion brought the head to Spain from the Holy Land in 1108 AD. Originally it
was thought to be the head of James the Lesser, but the injuries did not match and it was later
concluded that it was the head of James the Greater after all: he died from a Roman execution
method called three blows on the skull. This would agree with the story of Theudas in Josephus,
assuming that Theudas was James: Fadus cut the head off and transported it to Jerusalem. the head
might have stayed in the Holy Land. I think this happened in 44 AD and Theudas was James, son of
Zebedee.

If Mariamne II preached gospel in France, it left no signs. There was a Christian community in
Arles in 254 AD and Christianity came to France through ports like Marseille (Massilia) very early.
The Golden Legend on Mary Magdalena may have a true historical basis, but nothing remains to
find.

There may be something to say of Antipas, at least as much as to pose a speculative question.
According to Josephus Antiquities Herod Antipas was expelled to Lugdunum in 39 AD. Lugdunum
may be Lyon or it can be Lugdunum Convenarum (Saint-Bertrand-de-Commiges) on the pilgrim
way to Santiago de Compostela. The latter fits to Josephus in War where he gives the place where
Antipas was expelled as Spain. Herodias went with Herod Antipas. Both are said to have died two
years later. The interesting issue is that the name Antipas appears once in the Bible. In the
Revelation 2:13 Jesus tells of Antipas, my wittness, my faithful, who was killed among you (i.e.,
Chrisiians in Pergamon), there where Satan has his throne. The Church has understood this in the
way that there was Saint Antipas who died in Pergamon, but maybe it is not so. Herod Antipas (not
any more called Herod) died in Lugdunum, not in Pergamon, but Lugdunum Covenarum was the
center of the imperial cult. The main opponent of Christians was not Zeus, whose altar was in
Pergamon (and is now in Pergamommuseum in Berlin). It was the Roman Caesar, who demanded to
be worshipped as god. This was the case in the time of Caligula, especially in the years 39-41 AD,
and it also was true in the time of Diolectian when the Revelation was written. It does seem strange
that Herod Antipas would be called wittness and faithful to Jesus, especially considering how Luke
describes him. But Luke also describes Mary Magdalena, i.e., Mary of Bethany, as a sinfull woman.
Only in Luke, Herod Antipas is in Jerusalem at the time of crucifixion and he and his soldiers mock
Jesus. In Marc the mocking soldiers are Roman soldiers under Pilate's command. John's gospel, in
many details the most knowledgeable, does not mention Herod Antipas at all. What makes one
think that Herod Antipas may have been a supporter of Jesus is that Johanna, the wife of the
treasurer of Herod Antipas, supported Jesus with her funds, and in the Antioch congregation there
was Manean, who had grown up with Herod Antipas. Herod Antipas did excecute John the Baptist,
it is told also in Josephus, but later his court may have been one of the the main supporters of Jesus.
Antipas in Revelation 2:13 may be Herod Antipas and he and Herodias may have been killed by
priests of the imperial cult in Lugdunum as wittnesses and faithful to Judaism against the divination
of the Caesar.

More than this I cannot get out of the story of Magdalena in France. Speculation, but there simply
are not enough reliable documents in bible history for solid science. I will not include references as
that is a way to pretend that a text is more scientific than it is. All mentioned here can be easily
found.