There are many interconnectins to the nomenclatures used and foundations as a result of foundation in names. You can go into Mexico and find untold numbers of persons using the name "Jesus" (he-sus). Obviously i would not employ this as an argument in favor of Jesus being a real person; it is tantamount to saying that Santa Claus existed because of references to him in many cultures. My point here is actually that there are root meanings to words and names. This is evidenced by the following passage:
The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning "Jehovah is salvation." Though the name in one form or another occurs frequently in the Old Testament, it was not borne by a person of prominence between the time of Josue, the son of Nun and Josue, the high priest in the days of Zorobabel. It was also the name of the author of Ecclesiaticus of one of Christ's ancestors mentioned in the genealogy, found in the Third Gospel (Luke, iii, 29), and one of the St. Paul's companions (Col., iv, 11). During the Hellenizing period, Jason, a purely Greek analogon of Jesus, appears to have been adopted by many ( I Mach., viii, 17; xii, 16; xiv, 22; II Mach., i, 7; ii, 24; iv, 7 26; v, 5 10; Acts, xvii, 5 9; Rom., xvi, 21). The Greek name is connected with verb iasthai, to heal; it is therefore, not surprising that some of the Greek Fathers allied the word Jesus with same root (Euseb., "Dem. Ev.", IV; cf. Acts, ix, 34; x., 38). Though about the time of Christ the name Jesus appears to have been fairly common
The archeological evidence for the Bible's authenticity is overwhelming. Unlike the writings of Mohammed, Joseph Smith, or other so-called prophets, with every turn of the archaeologist's spade there is more proof that the Bible is historically accurate. The problem is that much within the Bible has been written enigmatically and without detailed reference.
Despite this there does seem to be historic references to this one perticular Jesus and the tumult arising from his acts that both threw the Jewish priests and Rome into turmoil.
Until 1961, according to Josh Mcdowell in his excellent work Evidence that Demands a Verdict, the name of Pontius Pilate (the man who eventually sentenced Jesus to death) was unheard of outside of the Biblical record. However, in 1961 two Italian archeologists discovered a record of his service as Prefect of Judea in the region of Caesarea...the Roman capital of Palestine!
Another example is found in the book of Daniel. Daniel speaks of a king named Belshazzar of Babylon. Because of this reference, the book was dismissed as fictional due to the fact that there was no mention of a king with that name in existence other than Daniel's account. It was later discovered that the reigning king at that time, Nabonidus, had appointed Belshazzar as his co-regent while at war away from Babylon. Daniel was accurate, and the historicity of the Bible was proven once again.
There are actual historical proofs that a Jesus of Nazareth did exist, and was considered a political rebel, who was crucified for treason.
This was recorded by a Roman in the time of Augustus. the Roman historian Tacitus, who, writing between 115-117 A.D. had said the following, ""They got their name from Christ, who was executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. That checked the pernicious superstition for a short time, but it broke out afresh-not only in Judea, where the plague first arose, but in Rome itself, where all the horrible and shameful things in the world collect and find a home." From his Annals, xv. 44. This evidence was from an atheist.
Suetonius, personal secretary of Emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD), spoke of Christians and the fact that they were expelled from the city of Rome by Claudius in 49 AD because they were teaching Christ. Acts 18:2 states that Aquila and Priscilla came to Corinth from Rome because Claudius had driven the Jews out of Rome. And Christianity was known to been introduced to the world by Jews.
Mention of Jesus can also be found in Jewish Rabbinical writings from what is known as the Tannaitic period, between 70-200 A.D. In Sanhedrin 43a it says: "Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, 'He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whoever has anything to say in his defence, let him come and declare it.' As nothing was brought forward in his defence, he was hanged on Passover Eve."
It is not surprising how few writings exist outside of Biblical/religious reference, comparatively speaking, but this is true because very few Roman historic references from this time period exist at all of a kind which might be even remotely expected to mention Christ. As far as the Roman world was concerned, Jesus was a nobody who live in an insignificant province, sentenced to death by a minor procurator.
The truth is there is far more evidence for the existence of this one "Jesus" in records of the time than there is of Jehoshua ben Pandira. Unfortunately, the foundation of the Christian religion and its various sects has led to much of this evidence and "testament" being enhanced, and heightened. Proof is a difficult thing as History and time have a way of washing away real evdidences and those who might affirm testament themselves have become dust.