Matthew 13:55

οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ τέκτονος υἱός; In Mark 6:3, ὁ υἱὸς Μαρίας καὶ�; No allusion being made to the father, as in the other synoptists, possibly Joseph was no longer living. For ὁ τέκτονος υἱὸς Mark has ὁ τέκτων. As every Jew was taught a trade there would be no improbability in the carpenter’s son becoming a scribe. But it was known that Jesus had not had the ordinary education of a scribe.

οἱ�. Probably the sons of Joseph and Mary. It is certain that no other view would ever have been propounded except for the assumption that the blessed Virgin remained ever-virgin.

Two theories have been mooted in support of this assumption. (1) The ‘brethren of the Lord’ were His cousins, being sons of Cleophas (or Alphæus), and Mary, a sister of the Virgin Mary. (2) They were sons of Joseph by a former marriage.
Neither of these theories derives any support from the direct words of Scripture, and some facts tend to disprove either. The second theory is the least open to objection on the ground of language, and of the facts of the gospel.
The brethren of the Lord were probably not in the number of the Twelve. This seems to be rendered nearly certain by St John’s assertion (Matthew 7:5) οὐδὲ γὰρ οἱ�, and is strengthened by the way in which the brethren’s names are introduced, as though they were more familiar than Jesus to the men of Nazareth; it seems to be implied that they were still living there.

James afterwards became president or bishop of the Church at Jerusalem: he presided at the first Council and pronounced the decision: διὸ ἐγὼ κρίνω κ.τ.λ. (Acts 15:19). The authorship of the Epistle is generally ascribed to him. His manner of life and his death are described by Hegesippus (Eus. H. E. II. 23, p. 58, 59, Bright’s ed.). Of Joses nothing further is known. Jude is most probably to be identified with the author of the Epistle bearing his name. Tradition has an interesting story concerning his two grandsons, who being arrested as descendants of the royal house and therefore possible leaders of sedition, and brought before the Emperor Domitian, described their poverty, and shewed him their hands, rough and horny from personal toil, and so dispelled the idea of danger and regained their freedom (Eus. H. E. III. 21). Of Simeon tradition has nothing certain or trustworthy to report.

For the many difficult and intricate questions involved in the controversy as to the ‘brethren of the Lord,’ see the various articles in Dict. of the Bible, and Bp. Lightfoot’s dissertation in his edition of the Epistle to the Galatians.