Irish and Scottish Genealogy



Many have heard, and are very familiar with, the terms “Irish” and “Scottish”, and really don’t know the difference between the two. The Irish and Scots are really the same people except they arrived in Britain two thousand years apart. The ancestors of the Irish arrived in Britain about 1600 B.C., while the Scots arrived about 501 A.D. It is simply amazing that two groups of the same people would wander through the earth and end up locating within a few miles from each other two thousand years later in Britain. Because there are two different groups of the same peoples concerned here, we will have to treat them separately even though they came from the same family. We will first investigate the background of the Irish.

The Irish are a very ancient people, and their history covers a large span of time. If we will take the time to do a little arithmetic, we will soon see we are talking about approximately 3,500 years or better. With the United States being 223 years old (1999), you can see the Irish history is about 18 times as old as we are. When one considers all the things that have happened since 1776, it is staggering to imagine what has happened to the Irish people over a period of 3,500 years.

It all started when a very grand lady by the name of Tamar had twin boys by her father-in-law. A lot of people judge Tamar as a woman with a low moral reputation. This is because they don’t know all the details of this complicated story. In the birthing process, it appeared that the one twin (Zerah) was going to be born first as he put out his hand. The midwife put a scarlet thread around his hand to mark the firstborn child. To the midwife’s amazement, the other twin (Pharez) proceeded to come out first. It was always of the utmost importance to identify the firstborn in the case of twins, for the firstborn received the birthright. Today, both the Irish and Scots claim the emblem of the hand with the scarlet thread (or the red hand), showing they are of the Zerah branch of Judah. To bring you this 3,500 year old history, I will be quoting from various authors who have written various phases of this history.

If you will remember, Judah (and I am not talking about “Jews”) was to be the royal tribe, Genesis 49:9-12:

9 Judah is a lion’s whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? 10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall  the gathering of the people be. 11 Binding his foal unto the vine, and his asss colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes: 12 His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.

With this passage, we can already see more symbology of Judah appearing. To get started with this almost forgotten history of the Irish (as being Zerah Judah), I will quote from Father Abraham’s Children, by Perry Edward Powell, Ph. D., pages 98-101;

Let us put it in a different way, here is the beginning of royalty. What else does scepter mean? Judah led in the conquest of Canaan and received the first and choicest portion. David raised it to pre-eminence over the tribes and the nations. He is the first king of the Judah-Pharez line, and he did not appear for seven hundred years. Was there and is there an older line of royalty? The answer is, Yes. The Judah-Zerah [line] was royal from the beginning. The two royalties are now merged and have been for centuries in the British royal house. And how long shall we have royalty? ‘Until Shiloh comes.’ [The future] Shiloh came to Bethlehem, the first Advent, and will come again [as Shiloh] at the end of time, the second Advent. Royalty is eternal. The throne of David is everlasting. There is no royalty in Europe but descends from Judah. And the Judah-Zerah royalty is, we repeat, seven hundred years older than Judah-Pharez because it began at once. You can read Genesis 38 to see how royalty began [but there is much more to talk about].

Another great event is recorded in Genesis 46:12, [if we dare mention it]. Here we can read the census of those of the family of Jacob who went with him into Egypt, eventually into Egyptian bondage though they did not know it at the time. Pharez took with him his two sons, (which did not include Shelah). Now Zerah went alone. No son accompanied him. We will see where the son later traveled. Here is the inference and the conclusion, The Trojan-Welsh by-passed the Egyptian captivity, and all other captivities and have never been in slavery to any man, in any land, at any time. (Slight changes or additions in brackets above.)

Zerah’s son Ethan, very wise, and indeed this line of Judah-Zerah is the only royal line termed wise, on the other hand led his people north, from Egypt where he was born, into what is now Asia Minor, and his son Mahol continued likewise. Mahol’s heir, Darda, reached the western shore, where on a commanding site, he founded the metropolis of Troy. The date is 1520 B.C. Here the city flourished for nearly four hundred years. Darda first saw the straits that separated Europe and Asia and gave them his name, Dardanelles. Darda also founded a fort here that is named after him. But the greatest honor is recorded in the Bible, Solomon was ‘wiser than all men; than ... Darda the son of Mahol.’ Thus great was the founder of Troy and the sire of the Trojan race whose children abide with us still. Troy fell because her sons had an eye for the refined and beautiful in woman (sic). Her descendants have that exquisite eye still and are naturally very proud of the accomplishment. ...

When Troy fell she did so to arise on another shore in eternal and imperial splendor. I am not referring to Italy. That empire though long was ephemeral (short-lived). Italy is an interlude only. Aeneas, a member of the old royal family, attained the kingship, led the saddened Trojans around the Mediterranean Sea, as graphically described in the Aenead, and finally brought them to their new home on the Tiber in Italy. Including this Italian interlude, the Trojan period embraced 417 years.

Here on the Tiber happened a very sad event, too sad to be recalled, and would not be except for its denouement (final outcome). Brutus was one day hunting with his father Silvius, when he spied the prey, as he thought, and let fly an arrow. On running up he was shocked and grieved to find that he had killed his own father! Some people then, as now, were censorious and Brutus departed from the new colony, from which later sprang Rome, and with his royal followers, went to Greece, rallied the enslaved Trojans, defeated King Pendrasus, thus erasing the defeat of Troy, and as victor exacted these terms; he must give his daughter Ignoge for wife, furnish a big fleet of ships fully provisioned, for his emigrant force of seven thousand men, and free permission for them to sail unmolested. ...

Brutus, now with an object and direction, steered west through the straits (pillars) of Hercules, then northward along the east Atlantic main, across the English Channel to the present river Dart, and up its stream to Totnes where stepping on a large stone he landed on the great island which was ever to bear his name as a memorial among the proud nations of the world. This rock, more famous throughout the centuries than Plymouth Rock, is marked as Brutus Rock, and has been visited perennially by people of all nations, all ranks, and all ages. With his people he explored the whole island and he apportioned to each one according to his rank and services. At last he decided the proper place for his capital, a choice bank of the Thames river, so named for a stream, Thyamis, in Epirus from which he first sailed, and there he built his metropolis, and according to the advice of the oracle, he named it Tri Novantum, New Troy. This name it bore for over eleven hundred years when King Lud at the beginning of the Christian era built her walls and renamed her Luddun, Lud’s wall, easily refined into London. London is also derived by some from Llandin, meaning ‘Sacred eminence.’ London dates from three hundred-fifty years before Rome. Why should Rome be called the Eternal City?

If you are of Irish or Scottish descent, this history, as told here, may seem strange and wonderfully astonishing. I am sure many of you have never heard anything quite like this, or were never taught anything remotely comparable in school. We really shouldn’t take the word of one writer concerning this history though. In the booklet, Our Neglected Heritage, “The Magnet of The Isles”, by Gladys Taylor, vol. 3, page 27 we read this:

The Reverend William Milner, in his chart of The Royal House of Britain, gives the two grandsons of Judah, Calcol and Darda, as Cecrops and Dardanos. The more we study the classical references to these founders of cities, dynasties and legal systems, the more they appear to resemble Calcol and Darda, who were the children of Zarah, a migrating section of the family of Judah, the sceptre tribe. Were the grandsons of Judah beginning to put into effect the responsibilities of their tribe as kings and administrators? ...

After the fall of Troy, the royal house of Dardanos was divided and scattered. Caesar claimed descent from Aeneas and Virgil wrote the Aeneid to proclaim this fact. From Ascanius Julius, son of Aeneas and Creusa, daughter of Priam King of Troy, came the Julian family of Rome and also Brutus the Trojan, grandson of Ascanius, who gathered together a band of Trojan exiles, soon after the fall of Troy and traveled westward to Britain. This could have been a considerable migration. From a wealth of Greek and Latin literature dealing with the departure of the Trojans, notably the Trojan Cycle, listed by Proclus in the second century A.D., we gather that Aeneas departed from Mount Ida with 88,000 Trojans and built a fleet of 332 vessels. We leave Aeneas in Italy and follow Brutus and his companions to Britain.

What this information is telling you is, if you are Irish you are directly related to the Trojans, or if you are Scottish, you are indirectly related, and both the Irish and Scottish are direct descendants of Judah, or Israelites. And what may seem more astounding, the so-called “Jews” are not now, nor ever were Israelites. They are actually descendants of Cain the murderer!




This is a true story which very few have any knowledge of today. The facts of its existence have been almost totally erased from history. Although, almost forgotten by those who should be concerned the most, there is substantial evidence extant to prove it's existence beyond all doubt. Actually the Irish church was established in 37 A.D. To have an understanding of the Irish church is an all important fact in understanding Irish genealogy. To get started with this phase of our perusal (study), I am going to quote again from the book, Father Abraham’s Children, by Perry Edwards Powell, Ph. D., pages 140-142:

Now we come to the missionary movement of Joseph of Arimathea, who was appointed by Philip the apostle. After the passion of his Nephew, persecution fell heavily upon the infant church. The Jew and the Roman were bitter persecutors but he knew where there was no persecution, but protection. However, he was seized, and since the Jew could not kill [under the Law directly], he and Lazarus and Mary and Martha his sisters, Mary Magdalene, Marcella, Maximin, and others, all objects of especial Jewish hostility, were ‘exposed to the sea in a vessel without sail or oars.’ They drifted to Marseilles, southern Gaul, where they arrived in a famished condition. The Arimathean knew the territory and friendly traders, and was aided on his way, the destination of which was now Britain. Here they eventually arrived and came to rest in Ynis Avalon, Glastonbury, where he rested and soon began his labors for his Nephew. The year was 37 A.D. On his tomb is the epitaph: Ad Britannos veni post Christum sepelivi Docui Quievi. ‘I came to the Britons after I had buried the Christ. I taught. I have entered on my rest.’

Thus was established the first above ground church in the world at Glastonbury, in Britain. I am sure there are many who have never heard this particular story of Joseph of Arimathea, and fewer yet understand its importance. For more insight on Joseph of Arimathea, I will quote, The Traditions of Glastonbury, by E. Raymond Capt M.A., page 22:

Several ancient manuscripts indicate that after the Passion of Christ, Joseph of Arimathea was commissioned by St. Philip, the Apostle, to take the Gospel to Britain. One such manuscript is the ‘Victory of Aurelius Ambrosius’ by Gildas Albanicus. It asserts plainly that Britain received the Gospel in the time of Emperor Tiberius, and that Joseph was sent, with others (after the dispersion of the Disciples) to Britain by St. Philip. There, Joseph was to lay the foundation of the Christian religion. The author gives the date ‘about the year of Our Lord 63’ and adds that Joseph stayed in Britain the rest of his life.

Another manuscript, ‘De Antiquities of Glastonbury’ (1908), contains this entry in the opening chapter: ‘St. Philip ... coming into the country of the Franks to preach ... converted to the Faith, and baptized them. Working to spread Christ’s word, he chose twelve from among his disciples, and sent them into Britain. Their leader, it was said, was St. Philip’s dearest friend, Joseph of Arimathea, who buried the Lord.’ (Translated from ‘De Antiquite Glastonbiensis Ecclesia’ 1240)

We can see from this, that outside of a few at Jerusalem, the Gospel was first preached in Britain. This brings up one of the most misunderstood, one of the most misrepresented, and one of the most misquoted passages of Scripture in the Bible. Almost everyone misunderstands it, or has a twisted conception of its meaning. This Scripture is Romans 1:16 which reads, (KJV):

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

It’s not talking about the Canaanite “Jews” here, it’s speaking of the Judahites in Britain, and they got the Gospel message first just as it says! It should say: To the Tribe of Judah in Jerusalem and in Britain first, and also the Greek, and they were all Israelites, and nothing but Israelites! It was through Judah in Britain that the Gospel message was sent to all the other Israelite tribes. The few of Judah at Jerusalem, at this time, are hardly worth mentioning. For more documentation, we turn to the book, St. Joseph of Arimathea At Glastonbury, by Lionel Smithett Lewis, pages 92-93:

Cardinal Baronius, the great Church historian, and most learned librarian of the Vatican, in his Ecclesiastical Annals, on which he spent 30 years, under the year A.D. 35, states that in that year Joseph of Arimathea, Lazarus. Mary, Martha, Marcella, their maid, and Maximin (blind from birth until healed by Yahshua) a disciple, were put by the Jews into a boat without sails and oars, and floated down the Mediterranean and landed at Marseilles, and thence Joseph and his company crossed into Britain, and preached the Gospel there, and finally died there.




In the book, St. Joseph Of Arimathea At Glastonbury, by Lionel Smithett Lewis, it says this of King Lucius, (page 35):

St. Joseph’s little circle of twelve disciples was kept going by anchorites (hermits) as one died another was appointed; but in [the] course of time a certain slackness seems to have come over them. William of Malmesbury tells us that the holy spot at length became a covert of wild beasts. Then in the days of Good King Lucius aforesaid came a revival. Llewrug Mawr, Llewrug the Great (grandson of Saint Cyllinus and great-grandson of Caractacus), nicknamed Lleiver Mawr or the great luminary (hence his Latinized name of Lux or Lucius), was king of Britain in the middle and towards the end of the 2nd century. He increased the Light that the first missionaries, the disciples of Christ, had brought, by sending emissaries to Eleutherius, Bishop of Rome, requesting him to send missionaries to Britain. The Welsh Triads tell us that Eleutherius, in response, sent Dyfan and Fagan, Medwy and Elfan, all of them British names in A.D. 167.

Actually, the “Bishop of Rome” spoken of here, at this time, was of the British church at Rome (Basilica Di Pudenziana) from where King Lucius received “missionaries.” British king Caractacus’ daughter (Claudia), married Pudens of 2 Tim. 4:21, all of whom were converted by the influence of the Irish British church, of which the Apostle Paul had direct contact. It is obvious that the entire history of Britain cannot be presented in this format, therefore I will give a general outline during this period:

w B.C. 55. Invasion of Britain by Rome under Julius Caesar.

w A.D. 37. Joseph of Arimathea establishes first above ground church in the world at Glastonbury, in Britain.

w A.D. 43. Edict of Emperor Claudius to exterminate Christian Britain.

w A.D. 52. Caractacus taken prisoner to Rome along with Bran, his three sons, and daughters — including Linus and Claudia of 2 Tim. 4:21.

w A.D. 53. Pudens and Claudia (Gladys) of 2 Tim. 4:21 marry.

w A.D. 60. The Boadicean War.

w A.D. 156. Good King Lucius, by edict, proclaims Britain the first Christian nation.

w A.D. 290-300. The Diocletian persecution.

w A.D. 306, At Britain, at his father's death, Constantine declares himself Emperor of Rome.

w A.D. 411. Rome withdraws troops from Britain.

w A.D. 449. Angles, Saxons and Jutes invade Britain for the next two centuries driving the British Culdee Celts to the extreme west.

We read the next sequel, from The Origin and Early Christianity In Britain, by Andrew Gray, D.D., pages 60-62:




But the whole of the western part of the country remained unconquered. Strathclyde, including the country from the Clyde to the Dee, the Kingdom of Cumbria; North Wales, or Cambria; South Wales, and Devon and Cornwall, with part of Somerset and the sacred Avàlon, remained purely British. This land the English called Welsh-land, or the “Land of the Foreigner”, Welsh being the name which the Germans applied to all nations speaking languages of Latin descent ... and they found that all was lost, then, in A.D. 587, they were forced by persecution to fly and join their brethren in Wales.

To those parts we must now look for the Primitive Church of Britain. It was shut off from, and perhaps to a considerable extent forgotten by, the larger portion of Christendom; but it now formed a closer alliance with the sister Churches of Ireland and Scotland. It was conscious of no submission to any foreign Church, but gazed fondly back to Jerusalem and the Holy Land rather than to Rome. It had its own Liturgy, its own customs, its own peculiar (although erroneous) cycle of computing Easter. (Note: If they were keeping Passover at the time of the full moon regardless of the day of the week, as in the East, it was not erroneous.) It was orthodox in faith. It had, as we learn from Gildas, a regularly ordained Episcopate. It believed its Bishops to be the successors of the Apostles, and its priests claimed the power to bind and loose. ...

It is of the greatest importance that we should gather all the information possible concerning the Church in Wales, and get as definite an idea of it as we can. There are, unfortunately, those who erroneously suppose that the link between the early British Church and the Church of England of the present day, was broken by the Saxon invasion; and that the present Church of England arose in the time of Augustine, deriving its origin from Rome through him, and not, as we are bound to maintain, from the Apostles and Jerusalem in unbroken, continuous descent, through the British or Celtic Church. ... The Saxon invasion had destroyed civilization and Christianity in the larger part of England proper, but a remnant was driven westward, and found its home in Wales. ...




The Celtic church was finally driven to the extreme west of the region because of the two hundred years of Saxon invasions. The Saxons were, by this time, in possession of over 75% of the land. It appeared, again, the light might flicker and finally go out on the church which was started by Joseph of Arimathea, but suddenly the light recovered to shine even brighter. For this part of the story, I will quote from a secular source of history, The Story Of Civilization, Part IV, “The Age Of Faith”, by Will Durant, page 532:

As Germanic invasions of Gaul and Britain had driven scholars from those lands to Ireland, so now the wave returned, the debt was paid; Irish missionaries flung themselves upon the victorious pagan Angles, Saxons, Norwegians, and Danes in England, and upon the illiterate and half-barbarous Christians of Gaul and Germany. with the Bible in one hand and classic manuscripts in the other; and for a time it seemed that the Celts would win back through Christianity the lands they had lost to force. It was in the Dark Ages that the Irish spirit shone with its strongest light.

The greatest of these missionaries was St. Columba. We know him well through the biography written (c. 679) by Adamnan, one of his successors at Iona. Columba was born at Donegal in 521, of royal stock; ... he was a saint who could have been a king. At school in Moville he showed such devotion that his schotext-aspan style=, DefaultText,lign: center; text-inden,t: .25inolmaster named him Columbkille Column of the Church. From the age of twenty-five he founded a number of churches and monasteries, of which the most famous were at Derry, Durrow, and Kells. But he was a fighter as well as a saint, “a man of powerful frame and mighty voice”; his hot temper drew him into many quarrels, at last into war with King Diarmuid a battle was fought in which, we are told, 5000 men were killed; Columba, though victorious, fled from Ireland (563), resolved to convert as many souls as had fallen in that engagement at Cooldrevna. He now founded on the island of Iona, off the west coast of Scotland, one of the most illustrious of medieval monasteries. Thence he and his disciples brought the Gospel to the Hebrides, Scotland, and northern England. And there, after converting thousands of pagans and illuminating 300 “noble books”, he died, in prayer at the altar, in his seventy-eighth year.




You will notice in the last paragraph above, the Celtic missionaries converted northern Saxons in England, but not the southern Saxons. To convey the story of how they were converted to Roman Catholicism, I will relate the story from the book, The Horizon History Of Christianity, by Roland H. Bainton, pages 142-143:

Augustine commenced in Kent under the favor of Queen Bertha, a Christian queen (Merovingian French princess, obviously a British Celtic convert)  eager to convert her pagan husband. King Ethelbert was willing to grant Augustine an audience but only out of doors, where Augustine would be less able to exercise what the king supposed were magical powers; for he was reputed to be able to make tails grow on the backs of those with whom he was displeased. The king was so far persuaded that he granted land for the foundation of a monastery at Canterbury, ever after to be the seat of the English primate.

The reason, today, we are so unaware of the fact that the British church was the true church established by Joseph of Arimathea, by the direction of St. Philip, is because most all the records have been destroyed. There have been enough records to survive, though, to establish beyond all doubt that the church of Britain (not to be confused with the present day Anglican Church of England) was the true church, before being Romanized. For this reason most everyone has assumed that the true church was the Roman Catholic Church, which is entirely false. Neither the Roman Catholic Church nor her Protestant daughters represent the true church established by our Messiah. There was a church established at Rome, and Linus (the son of Caractacus) was appointed by the Apostle Paul to be the first Bishop, and it was not related in any way to the Roman Catholic Church, ever! It was called, Basilica Di Pudenziana (also the Palace of the British). I will quote from, The Drama of the Lost Disciples, concerning this true British church at Rome, by George F. Jowett, page 125:

The church still stands and can be seen in what was once the palatial grounds of the Palatium Britannicum, a memorial to the Christianizing endeavors of St. Paul and the expatriate (exiled) royal British family at Rome with Rufus Pudens. The church is recorded in Roman history under four different names: 1. Palatium Britannicum; 2. Titulus; 3. Hospitium Apostolorum; 4. Lastly, as St. Pudentiana in honour and memory of the martyred daughter of Claudia Pudens, by which name it is known to this day.




For this information, I am going to quote from the book The Origin and Early History of Christianity In Britain, by Andrew Gray, D.D., pages 88-89:

It will be seen that the transaction, on the part of the Roman Pontiff at least, was of the most deliberate and carefully calculated kind. It is a little marvellous (sic) that Romanists of to-day in Ireland are so ill at ease under English rule. ...Henry, under various pretexts, with the sanction and approval of the Pope, took his armies to Ireland. The Irish chiefs, taken singly, soon submitted to him, and paid him homage. The Bishops agreed to an ecclesiastical union with the Church of England. Then Henry, to suit his own ends, handed over the Irish Church to the Pope of Rome. By these unwarranted acts schism was introduced, and Bishops and priests were appointed by order of the Pope. A few of the Bishops still continued to assert an independent position, and offered here and there a spasmodic resistance, but the independence of the Celtic Church was gone. She had been betrayed by the King of England and the Pope of Rome. Irish national independence, and Irish ecclesiastical independence terminated practically together, and in both cases by fraud and grasping usurpation. The fate was sealed when Gelasius, Archbishop of Armagh, visited Dublin in 1172, and made his formal submission to King Henry II. From this date to the Reformation the papacy held sway, and the history of the 350 years which followed the Synod of Cashel when the Irish Church agreed to an ecclesiastical union with the English is indeed a dreary one.




For information pertaining to “The Donation Of Constantine” I will quote from: The Horizon History Of Christianity, by Roland H. Bainton, pages 243-244:

We do find skepticism of a sort in the form of historical criticism used to expose the spuriousness of famous forgeries and to examine sacred documents critically. Historical criticism was a by-product of studies by the Humanists, whose profound interest in the antique encouraged a pure Latin style. Through their comparison of classical and medieval Latin, there arose an awareness of philological (study in literature and linguistic) development. “The Donation of Constantine”, upon which the papacy long based its claims to dominion, was exposed as a forgery by Lorenzo Valla. The language, he pointed out, was not that of the age of Constantine. In the document there were references to the iconoclastic controversy of the eighth century. Documents of the period of Constantine never once mentioned the Donation, and at no time during that emperor’s reign did the popes actually exercise the authority Constantine was supposed to have bestowed upon them. Valla disproved also the common assumption that the Apostles’ Creed was the work of the twelve apostles. More daring was his application of historical, critical methods to the study of the Bible, even though he came up with no startling conclusions. As far as the Church was concerned, Valla’s demonstrations were not especially disturbing. She could survive the exposure of forgery. (See also, The Story Of Civilization; Part IV, “The Age Of Faith”, by Will Durant, pages 525-526, along with footnote.)


Clifton A. Emahiser’s Teaching Ministries

1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, OH 44830

Please Feel Free To Copy, Or Order:

8 ½ x 14 format. One sheet printed on

each side.

10 for 2.00; 25 for 3.00; 50 for 5.00 or 8.00 per 100


text-align: justify; text-indent: .15in;