21 Professor Zimmer’s Theory
The general obscurity which surrounds the early history of Ireland, the difficulties which have been found in making out the period of Patrick’s career from indefinite and contradictory data, the fact that while his death fell on any theory in the fifth century, no mention of him in literature is found before the seventh, these circumstances have led to a variety of theories which beset and embarrass the student who approaches Patrician literature. Patrick has been in turn eliminated and reduplicated; and, in revenge for undue magnification, his rôle has been reduced to something quite insignificant. We may say that his writings, like the poems of Homer, have been taken away from him to be ascribed to some one else of the same name. It is needless to notice here theories which are fantastic or baseless, and have never gained any general or wide acceptance, but the view which has been recently developed by the brilliant Celtic philologist, Professor Zimmer,443 cannot be passed over without criticism.
In another note I have referred to Zimmer’s identification of Patrick with Palladius. This is necessitated by, but would not necessitate, his theory. If it were demonstrated to-morrow that Patrick and Palladius were one and the same person, this would be quite as compatible with the view of Patrick adopted in the foregoing pages as with the view of Zimmer. Palladius may provisionally be left out of account for the purpose of the present criticism, though I shall have a few words to say on the subject at the end of this excursus.
Zimmer fully admits, though he had once denied, the genuineness of the Confession and the missive to the subjects of Coroticus; that is, he admits that they were written by Patricius, a bishop in Ireland in the fifth century. But he holds that the activity of this bishop was entirely confined to south-eastern Ireland (Laigin), that he accomplished nothing for the evangelisation or ecclesiastical organisation of the rest of Ireland, that he died (A.D. 459: Zimmer) conscious of failure, and for nearly two centuries after his death had a merely local reputation. The rejection of the traditional Patrick is, so far as I understand, based chiefly on two arguments: (1) Zimmer’s interpretation of the Confession; and (2), if Patrick’s work had at all corresponded in scope, magnitude, and import to the descriptions of it given by Irish writers of the seventh century, it would have been noticed by Bede in his Ecclesiastical History. As for the Confession I have said enough in the text, and have shown, I think, that its note is not, as Zimmer holds, consciousness of failure. As for the argument from the silence of Bede,444 on which he lays much stress, I may quote what I said in reviewing his book: The value of arguments from silence “depends entirely on the cases; in some cases an argument from silence is conclusive. But can it be said to weigh much here, if we reflect that a notice of Patrick and his work in Bede’s book could have been simply a defensible digression? We can place our finger on the unproven premiss in Zimmer’s argument; he speaks of ‘Bede’s evidently keen interest in the early beginnings of Christianity in the British isles’ (p. 11). Substitute ‘Britain’ for ’the British isles’ and the cogency of the argument disappears. Ninian and Columba are immediately relevant to his subject, Patrick is not; and, assuming the common tradition of Patrick’s work (as believed in Ireland c. A.D. 700) to be roughly true, it would be no more surprising to find nothing about it in Bede than it would be to find no mention of Augustine in an ecclesiastical history of Germany written on the same lines as Bede’s.”—English Hist. Review, July 1903.445
Zimmer’s reason for restricting the sphere of work of his Patricius to Laigin, or part of Laigin, seems to be the circumstance that the author of the earliest biography, Muirchu, belonged to this part of Ireland, being connected with Slébte. [It is possible, though he does not allege it, that another reason may have been the tradition which associates Palladius (whom he equates with Patrick) with the territory corresponding to the county of Wicklow.] The suggestion is that in this neighbourhood, at Slébte, for instance, were preserved traditions and writings of the obscure Patricius, who was in the seventh century to be transformed into the great apostle of Ireland. It is obvious that the argument, even if it were based on a correct statement of facts, is quite insufficient to prove the thesis.
But the statement of facts is not correct. There is another document which, though also dating from the second half of the seventh century, may claim (see above, p. 248) to have some slight advantage in point of priority over the Life of Muirchu. This is the Memoir of Tírechán. He had nothing whatever to do with Laigin; he was connected with Connaught and Meath. His spiritual master, Ultan, was a bishop at Ardbraccan, and had in his possession a book concerning the life of Patrick. We might therefore, if we adopted Professor Zimmer’s method of argument, conclude that the sphere of the true Patrick’s activity was confined to a part of the kingdom of Meath. The mere existence of Tírechán’s work forbids us to attach to the provenance of Muirchu’s work any significance of the kind which Zimmer attributes to it.
It must also be observed in what a strange light Zimmer’s theory would place the work of Muirchu. We should have to suppose that this writer, taking upon himself to be Patrick’s biographer because he belonged to the province in which Patrick had worked, ignores entirely Patrick’s connexion with that province (merely mentioning that he landed on the coast of Laigin), and devotes all his space to legendary adventures in other parts of Ireland.446 As a matter of fact, a critical analysis of his work shows that a large amount of material depends on ancient local traditions of the Island-Plain in Ulidia.
This brings us face to face with the great difficulty which Zimmer has to meet. How, and why, and when was the obscure Patricius of fact transmuted into the illustrious Patricius of tradition? Zimmer’s answer to the question, when? has at least the merit of precision. He finds the motive of the glorification of Patrick in the Roman controversy of the seventh century, and he dates the appearance of the legend about A.D. 625. His own words must be quoted (Celtic Church, p. 80):—
It would not require a long stretch of imagination if we assume that, about 625, Ireland’s pious wish of having an apostle of her own was realised by reviving the memory of this Patricius, who had been forgotten everywhere except in the south-east. It was in this way, I think, that the Patrick legend sprang up with its two chief premisses: first, that Ireland was entirely pagan in 432, as the lands of the Picts and of the Saxons had been in 563 and 597 respectively; and secondly, that Patrick converted Ireland within a short time and introduced a Christian Church, overcoming all obstacles and winning the favour of King Loigaire, incidents analogous to Columba’s conversion of King Brude, or Augustine’s of Ethelbert of Kent.
Pointing out that the first mention of Patricius is in connexion with a Paschal cycle, in Cummian’s letter to Segéne, Zimmer proceeds:—
Thus the Patrick legend is characterised on its first appearance as serving the endeavours of the Southern Irish to enter into the unitas Catholica by yielding to Rome on the Easter question.
It is to be observed that Zimmer does not categorically allege that the Patrick legend was invented by the Roman party in south Ireland. He leaves this open. He says: “If this legend was not expressly invented by an Irish member of the party in favour of conformity, it was, at any rate, utilised at once by that party.” Let us take in turn the two alternatives, (1) that it was invented expressly by the Roman party, (2) that it was otherwise invented, but precisely in time for them to utilise.
(1) This alternative implies that the legend was manufactured in south-eastern Ireland (the only place where, ex hypothesi, Patricius was remembered) for the purpose of bringing about the conformity of the northern Irish. But the legend itself, as developed in the seventh-century sources, as developed in Muirchu’s work, on which Zimmer lays great stress, repudiates this origin. Southern Ireland, south-eastern Ireland, do not appear in the legend at all (except the single reference to Fíacc and the mention of the landing in Wicklow); and it would require the strongest direct evidence to prove that, in spite of this radical fact, the legendary story originated there. The theory implies that the south-eastern Irish, while they resuscitated Patricius, made him over entirely, and transferred all their rights in him, to the north of the island—severed him entirely from themselves. So far as the single circumstance of the conversion of Loigaire and the incidents of the first Easter is concerned, that might pass; for in Loigaire, as High King, the south as well as the north of Ireland had part. But the point is that the whole setting connects Patrick with the north and not with the south. Zimmer’s hesitation shows, I suspect, that he was to some extent conscious of this difficulty; and so he leaves open
(2) The other possibility that the rise of the Patrick legend may have had another origin. The only motive he suggests is “Ireland’s pious wish of having an apostle of her own.” Now if the origin of the Patrick legend was independent of the Roman controversy, why need it be placed in A.D. 625? How are we to determine its date? The answer, which seems to be implied by Zimmer, is that it must have been subsequent to the times of St. Columba and St. Augustine, the object being to set up a primitive apostle, to be for Ireland what Columba and Augustine were for Pictland and for England. This is, of course, the purest speculation; but setting aside the question of date, we should have to suppose—if we are not to fall into the same difficulty as in the case of the first alternative—that the idea arose in north Ireland, and that the legend was invented there. This would imply that the northern ecclesiastical mytho-poets had recourse to south-eastern Ireland to find an obscure ecclesiastic to glorify; that they detached him ruthlessly from his home and appropriated him entirely. We need not, however, consider this improbability, as Zimmer himself does not contemplate it. His view is that Patrick was resuscitated “in the district of his special activity,” “with the help of his own writings and of documents about him.”
It would seem far more natural that if the Irish were in search of a founder, they should seize on Palladius, whose mission was recorded by Prosper. Zimmer therefore identifies Palladius with Patricius; but the Irish had no idea of such an identity.447 For in the oldest Life, Patricius and Palladius are distinguished. If, as Zimmer thinks, the creation of an apostle was due to a “specific tendency,” namely, approximation to Rome, it would be strange if Palladius, for whose direct mission from Rome there existed the record of Prosper, were not chosen. The legend of the conversion, the story of the first Paschal celebration, could as easily have been spun round him as round the author of the Confession. Zimmer avoids the difficulty by identifying them.
For his combination of the rise of the Patrick legend with the Paschal question, Zimmer lays much stress on Muirchu. I have pointed out above (Appendix A, ii. 3) that a certain indirect connexion between Muirchu’s work and events connected with the Roman controversy may be fairly inferred. But this inference does not furnish any support for Zimmer’s daring theory. And it is important to notice in this connexion that Muirchu did not believe that Patrick went to Rome; he admits that he wished to do so, but denies that he passed beyond Gaul. This in itself would make us hesitate to believe that the story of Patrick, as expounded by Muirchu, was a recent fabrication in the interests of the Roman cause.
But we may waive all particular criticisms of Zimmer’s reconstruction, and state the general and decisive objection to his or any similar theory. It is this. The nature of the traditions which are preserved in the two seventh-century compilations written by Tírechán and Muirchu forbids the hypothesis of recent fabrication. In the first place a critical examination of the texts of these works enables us to conclude that they were largely based on older written material. In the second place, it is perfectly inconceivable that all the detailed traditions which Tírechán collected both from written and from oral resources concerning Patrick’s work in Connaught should have been deliberately invented, between 625 and 660, in a region where Patrick’s name was never known. In the third place, the really characteristic Patrician stories, the death of Miliucc, the events of the first Easter, the story of Daire, are not of the kind which are fabricated, generations after the life of the hero, for a deliberate purpose. They belong to the legends that spring up soon after the death of their hero, or even during his lifetime. I may refer to what I have said in the text (p. 111). If we had no other evidence, the tale of the first Easter at Slane and Tara would be in itself a guarantee that the “Patrick legend” could not have been deliberately invented in the seventh century.
One more observation. It would be difficult to explain how it came that, if the author of the Confession spent his life in Leinster, and his name was sufficiently well remembered to make his fortune in the seventh century, no particular church in that region claimed him. Zimmer may get out of the difficulty through his identification of Palladius with Patrick; he may say that Patrick’s church was the Palladian Cell Fine, where memorials of Palladius were preserved. But this explanation would only serve to emphasise the improbability of the theory of identity. It is impossible to understand how Cell Fine remembered its founder as Palladius and not as Patricius, seeing that (ex hypoth.) the name Patricius (as used by the author of the Confession) had so completely superseded the name Palladius, that the bishop was not only glorified as Patricius in the seventh century, but even distinguished definitely from Palladius. Again: either it was remembered in south Ireland or it was not remembered at the beginning of that century, when the Patrician legend is alleged to have taken shape, that Palladius and Patricius were the same person. If it was remembered, then how came it that Palladius-Patricius was differentiated into two, when it was assuredly more in the interests of the Roman cause to glorify an apostle sent by Celestine than to discriminate a successful missionary who was not sent by a Pope, from an unsuccessful missionary who was? If it was not remembered, then the only passage which Zimmer can quote for the identification (Lib. Arm. p. 332, see above, p. 389, note) can be at once eliminated from the discussion, as resting on mere conjecture.
[The argument, which Zimmer adduces for his theory, from the statement that Patrick’s burial-place was unknown, falls to the ground when the evidence in regard to his burial-place is criticised as a whole. See above, Appendix C, 19.]
Footnotes
1 I may be permitted to remark that in vindicating the claims of history to be regarded as a science or Wissenchaft, I never meant to suggest a proposition so indefensible as that the presentation of the results of historical research is not an art, requiring the tact and skill in selection and arrangement which belong to the literary faculty. The friendly criticisms of Mr. John Morley in the Nineteenth Century and After, October 1904, and of Mr. S. H. Butcher in Harvard Lectures on Greek Subjects (1904), Lecture VI., show me that I did not sufficiently guard against this misapprehension.
2 For the expansion of Christianity in the first three centuries see Harnack’s invaluable work Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (1902).
3 Rufinus, Hist. ecc. ii. 7. For the Georgian legend of Nino see Life of St. Nino, translated by Marjory and J. O. Wardrop, in Oxford Studia Biblica et Ecclesiastica, vol. v. (1900).
4 De Vocatione Gentium, ii. 32.
5 On the other hand it may be questioned whether the army itself did anything to diffuse Christianity within the Empire. In the west certainly its chief significance in the history of religion was what it did to spread the solar, Mithraic worship. Cp. Harnack, op. cit. 268, 388.
6 Rufinus, Hist. ecc. i. 9.
7 Armenia was already Christian at the beginning of the fourth century in the days of Maximin.—Eusebius, Hist. ecc. ix. 8. 2.
8 Socrates, Hist. ecc. vii. 30.
9 The island of Man is indeed another exception. The Scottic colonisation of north-western Britain (Argyle, etc.) was comparatively late, but before the middle of the fifth century (see below, chap. ix. p. 192).
10 Professor Rhŷs thinks that it was to Ireland, more than to Britain, that the Gallic Druids went to learn their art, and that Caesar (in B. G. vi. 13) was badly informed; and he has recently stated this view in Studies in Early Irish History (Proceedings of British Academy, vol. i.), p. 35. It is remarkable that, apart from Caesar’s assertion, the only evidence for Druidism in southern Britain pertains to the island of Anglesey (Tacitus, Ann. xiv. 29), and Professor Rhŷs holds that in the first century A.D. Anglesey (Mona) was not yet Brythonic. Druidism in the Isle of Man is attested by a stone inscribed Dovaidona maqi Droata “(the burial-place) of Dovaido, son of (the) Druid.” See Professor Rhŷs in the Academy for August 15, 1890.
11 Tacitus, Agricola, c. 24, medio inter Britanniam atque Hispaniam sita. Cp. Caesar, B.G. v. 13. The notice in Orosius (Hist. i. 2, § 72) of the lighthouse at Brigantia in north-western Spain as built ad speculam Britanniae is noteworthy. Compare the remarks of Professor Rhŷs, op. cit. p. 47.
12 Tacitus, ib. aditus portusque per commercia et negotiatores cogniti.
13 Tacitus, ib. The policy recommended by Agricola, who considered one legion sufficient to hold the island, was based partly on the ground of political expedience. The conquest of Ireland, he thought, would have a similar wholesome effect on Britain to that which the conquest of Britain had on Gaul, by removing the spectacle of liberty (si Romance ubique arma et uelut e conspectu libertas tolleretur).
14 The baronies of Upper and Lower Deece, in Co. Meath.
15 Decies within Drum, and Decies without Drum, in Co. Waterford.
16 See note, Appendix B.
17 Ib.
18 It seems probable that Pelagius sprang from these Gaelic settlers in Britain. See below, p. 43.
19 See below, cap. viii. ad fin.
20 Un peuple n’emprunte pas l’alphabet des voisins s’il n’a pas à correspondre avec eux.... Qui donc constate un emprunt de monnaie et d’alphabet, en tous temps et en tous lieux, peut affirmer un échange de produits et d’idées (V. Bérard, Les Phéniciens et l’Odyssée, i. p. 20).
21 See Appendix C, 1.
22 See note, Appendix B.
23 See Appendix C, 2, for the following account of the invasions of Britain.
24 Circa A.D. 389; see Appendix C, 3.
25 See note, Appendix B.
26 There is no evidence, and no probability, that the name Paul was adopted on his conversion, or that it had anything to do with Sergius Paullus.
27 Frigeridus is Gothic Frigairêths.
28 For date see Appendix C, 3.
29 See Appendix C, 4.
30 Croagh Patrick, close to Westport.
31 Dalriada = north Antrim; Dalaradia = south Antrim and Down. The Latin form, Ulidia, is used in this book for Ulaid in the narrower meaning.
32 It has been conjectured that Miliucc’s dwelling was on the hill of Skerry, on the northern side of the Braid; see below, p. 86.
33 Another possible theory is mentioned in Appendix C, 4.
34 See note, Appendix B.
35 The association of Saint Elias with the sun was due to the resemblance of the name to the Greek ἥλιος.
36 See Appendix C, 6.
37 St. Honorat.—Lero is Ste. Marguerite.
38 A.D. 426.
39 A.D. 433.
40 His own expression “as a son” shows that parentes here means kinsfolk, not parents, and justifies the inference that his parents were dead.
41 Pelagius, Letter to Demetrias, Migne, P.L., xxxii. 1100.
42 Prosper has an epigram on the thesis that the whole life of non-Christians is sin:
Perque omnes calles errat sapientia mundi
Et tenebris addit quae sine luce gerit.
(Epig. 83, ed. Migne, 51, p. 524.)
43 Compare Celestine, Ep. iv. (Migne, P.L., 1. 434), nullus inuitis detur episcopus.
44 The conjecture is due to Professor Zimmer.
45 The old kingdom of Leinster, or Laigin, was south of the Liffey, and in this book “Leinster” is used in this sense (not equivalent to the modern province, which includes the old kingdom of Meath). See below, chap. iv.
46 See Appendix C, 9, on Patrick’s consecration.
47 No better illustration of this can be found than Pope Gregory’s provision for the mission of Augustine to England, as recorded in Bede, Hist. ecc. i. 29; he sent, besides fellow-workers, “uniuersa quae ad cultum erant ac ministerium ecclesiae necessaria, uasa videlicet sacra, et vestimenta altarium, ornamenta quoque ecclesiarum, et sacerdotalia uel clericilia indumenta, sanctorum etiam apostolorum ac martyrum reliquias, necnon et codices plurimos.”
48 It has recently been held, more plausibly but erroneously, that Patrick was on his way to Rome when the news of the death of Palladius overtook him. See Appendix C, 8.
49 Celestine probably died July 27, and Xystus succeeded July 31, 432. These dates have been determined by M. Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis, i. pp. ccli.-ii.
50 It is probable that excommunication by a Roman bishop was also recognised as universally binding. The question whether the popes had the right of annulling sentences pronounced by provincial councils on bishops, depends on the question of the authenticity of the Council of Sardica. See J. Friedrich, Sitzungsber. of the Bavarian Academy, 1901, 417 sqq.; E. Babut, Le concile de Turin, 75.
51 A.D. 366-384.
52 See Babut, Le concile de Turin (1904), a valuable work.
53 This has been well brought out by M. Babut.
54 Novella, xvi.
55 Commonitorium, ii. 33, 34.
56 The chief source for the social and economic conditions of ancient Ireland is the collection of the Ancient Laws of Ireland (6 vols., 1865-1901). A clear account of the general framework of society, with interesting details and illustrations, will be found in Dr. Joyce’s Social History of Ireland, vol. i.
57 Tuath = people, tribe, tribal district.
58 Flaith = noble.
59 The bó-aires.
60 The tributes and presents which are due from the under-kings to the over-kings, the donations which the over-kings owe to the under-kings, the privileges which the various kings possess, are the subject of the Book of Rights (edited and translated by O’Donovan, 1847), which still awaits a critical investigation. It is easy to see that it was compiled in Munster in the tenth century, but it was based on older material of high antiquity, and clearly reproduces the general character of the mutual relations which theoretically bound together the Irish kingdoms.
61 The king of Aileach was so called because his palace was at Aileach, near Londonderry. His territory was north Ulster to the Bann. Ulaid was east Ulster; Oriel, south Ulster.
62 This is clearly to be inferred from the Book of Rights, where no relations or mutual obligations are mentioned as existing between the three Ulster kings. Nor was there, since the destruction of the old Ulidian kingdom in the third century, any name to designate the whole province, for Ulaid was confined to the kingdom in the east of Ulster. The use of Ultonia to describe the province, as distinguished from Ulidia = Ulaid, is of course merely a literary convention.
63 See Petrie, Tara Hill, 135.
64 His date, according to the Annals, was A.D. 358-366; Niall reigned A.D. 379-405; his nephew, Dathi, 405-428; and then his son, Loigaire, 428-463. For Amolngaid (Dathi’s brother), king of Connaught, see Appendix C, 14.
65 Tyrconnell.
66 The derivation of the word druid (nom. drui, gen. druad) is uncertain. Perhaps, as Professor Rhŷs holds, Druidism was not of Celtic origin, and the word “was adopted by the Celts from some earlier population conquered by them” (see his “Studies in Early Irish History,” in Proceedings of the British Academy, vol. i. p. 8). Druidecht is the Irish for magic. For the functions and powers of the Druids some excellent pages in Dr. Joyce’s Social History, I. c. ix., may be recommended; illustrations and references will be found there.
67 Mug Ruith, servant of the wheel, was the name of a mythical Druid.
68 The Feth Fiada.
69 For these superstitious ceremonies at baptism cp. Duchesne, Origines du culte chrétien, pp. 296-7 (the exorcism of salt), 299, 317; cp. 349.
70 In the remarkable ancient Irish Christian incantation, the Lorica, ascribed to St. Patrick (see Appendix A, 5), the Trinity, Angels, Prophets, and other Christian powers are invoked, but also “might of heaven, brightness of sun, brilliance of moon, splendour of fire, speed of light, swiftness of wind, depth of sea, stability of earth, firmness of rock,” to intervene between him who repeats the spell when he arises in the morning and “every fierce merciless force that may come upon my body and soul; against incantations of false prophets, against black laws of paganism, against false laws of heresy, against deceit of idolatry, against spells of women and smiths and druids, against all knowledge that is forbidden [so Atkinson] the human soul.”
71 M. Réville, dealing with the third century, puts this very well. “Chacun croit sans le moindre difficulté à toutes les merveilles et à toutes les folies. On dirait même que plus une pratique est merveilleuse, plus elle a de chance d’être admise sans contestation. Chose singulière! les adeptes des religions opposées ne contestent pas la réalité des miracles allégués par leurs adversaires: Celse admet les miracles des chrétiens, et ceux-ci ne se refusent pas à admettre les miracles païens; des deux parts on attribue aux mauvais esprits les merveilles invoquées par les adversaires” (La Religion à Rome sous les Sévères, p. 131).
72 See note, Appendix B.
73 The Memoir by Tírechán.
74 The Life by Muirchu.
75 Cuchullin of legend.
76 Then called Brene Strait.
77 The Slaney (see Appendix B, note). It flows from L. Money past Raholp.
78 It has been conjectured that the stronghold of Miliucc was on the hill of Skerry, north of Slemish, on the other side of the Braid valley. Muirchu says that Patrick saw the conflagration from the south side of Slemish. We may interpret south to mean south-west. A cross, mentioned by Muirchu, was erected on the spot where the legend supposed Patrick to have stood, and the memory of this is still preserved in the name of the townland of Cross, on a hill to the west of Slemish.
79 Dr. W. Stokes, taking the story literally, suggests that Miliucc committed self-destruction as “a mode of vengeance” (Book of Lismore, p. 295).
80 Mag-inis, later known as Lecale (Leath Cathail), now the baronies of Lower and Upper Lecale. It is accurately described as a peninsular plain.
81 But meaning barn.
82 There is a second story (also recorded by Muirchu), clearly inspired by the same motive. Patrick was resting near Druimbo (in the north of Mag Inis, and close to a salt marsh), and he heard the noise of pagans who were busily engaged in making an earthwork. It was Sunday and he commanded them to cease from work. When they refused he cursed them: “Mudebrod! may your work not profit you!” and the sea rushed in, as in the other story, and the work was destroyed. The curse mudebrod (or mudebroth) has not been explained.
83 See above, chap. i. p. 14.
84 See Appendix C, 11.
85 See above, cap. iv. p. 72.
86 Compare what has been said above in chap. i. p. 9.
87 This name is the same as the British Vortigern (Welsh Gwrtheyrn), and the original Goidelic form was similar. It occurs in Ogam inscriptions, thus:... Maqi Vorrtigern<i>, on a stone of Ballyhank (near Cork), now in the Dublin Museum (Rhŷs, Proc. of R.S.A.I., pt. i. vol. xxxii. p. 9, 1902).
88 The distance of Tara from Slane is about ten miles.
89 Yet more remote from the Paschal season was the feast of Samhain at the close of autumn (November 1), when on the hill of Tlachtga, not far from Trim, a fire was kindled, from which, tradition says, all hearths in Ireland were lit. It was at Samhain too, according to tradition, that the High Kings used to hold such high festivals at Tara as are designated in the story. See note, Appendix B.
90 This incident is obviously suggested by St. John xx. 19, 26. When St. Columba went to the palace of King Brude the closed gates opened of their own accord (Adamnan, V. Col. ii. 35).
91 See note, Appendix B.
92 See note, Appendix B.
93 Tírechán, p. 308, perrexitque ad civitatem Temro ad Loigairium filium Neill iterum quia apud illum foedus pepigit ut non occideretur in regno illius.
94 See Appendix C, 12.
95 At Crag, in Co. Kerry.—Macalister, Studies in Irish Epigraphy, ii. p. 52.
96 Cp. Appendix A, ii. 5.
97 It should be Donagh-shaughlin, for Donagh is domnach, a church, whereas dún is a fort. There is no doubt that Dún here is a corruption, as we get the form Donnaclsacheling in a document of A.D. 1216 (Reeves, Eccl. Ant. p. 128).
98 See Appendix B, note on cap. ii. p. 23.
99 See Appendix A, i. 6. One of the best quatrains is the fourth:
Dominus illum elegit ut doceret barbaras
nationes, ut piscaret per doctrinae retia,
ut de seculo credentes traheret ad gratiam
Dominumque sequerentur sedem ad etheriam.
100 The Confession shows that this comparison was sometimes in Patrick’s mind.
101 Perfectam vitam, Hymn v. 4. Secundinus died A.D. 447, acc. to Ann. Ult.
102 Telltown comes by popular etymology from the genitive Taillteann. The site is marked by a round rath. O’Donovan said in 1856 that it had been in recent times a resort for the men of Meath for hurling, wrestling, and other sports (Four Masters, i. p. 22).
103 Herbord, Vit. Ott. ii. 14. The silence of early authorities is decisive against the isolated statement that Patrick preached at Taillte against the “burning of the first-born offspring.” (See Appendix B, note.)
104 Mac Fechach.—Tírechán, 310₂₄.
105 Áth Brón.—Tír. 307₂₈.
106 St. Colomb’s House. For its description and measurements see Petrie (Round Towers, 430-31), who compares it with St. Kevin’s House at Glendalough, and Dunraven’s Notes on Irish Architecture, vol. ii. p. 50 (plans and photograph).
107 Tírechán, 310-11.
108 See Appendix C, 4, ad fin.
109 See note, Appendix B.
110 It may be observed that if the idol of Mag Slecht had been eminently important for all Ireland, and had been destroyed at a period subsequent to St. Patrick, there could hardly fail to be a Christian record of its fall. In the Annals of the Four Masters, s.a. 464, it is said that Conall, son of Niall, ancestor of the lords of Tyrconnell, was done to death by the “old Folks” of Mag Slecht, who caught him unprotected. The thought occurs that Conall had supported the attack on the worship of Cenn Cruaich, and that his death was an act of vengeance wreaked by people of the plain who still clung to the old faith.
111 Perhaps A.D. 444-5. See Appendix C, 14.
112 See Appendix C, 13, on Patrick in Connaught.
113 At Duma Graid, close to Lake Kilglass. See Tírechán, 313, and Vit. Trip. p. 94.
114 Between Sligo and Leitrim.
115 May the name be the same as that of the tribe of the Anghaile (Annaly), who extended their power subsequently into Tethbia (cp. O’Donovan, Book of Rights, p. 11, note)?
116 Tamnach.
117 “Church of Bishop Brón.”
118 In Mag Airthic. See Appendix C, 13.
119 Ciarrigi. Through the baronies of Costello, Clanmorris, and Kilmaine. Possibly Aghamore, south of Kilkelly, may lie on the supposed route. It has been conjectured that the church in campo Nairniu (Tírechán, 321) was there.
120 In quo fiunt episcopi.
121 Muiriscc (Muir = sea) Aigli. (The promontory dominated by Knocknaree in Sligo Bay was also called Muiriscc, Tír. 327.) The promontory was also known as Umail. This name is preserved in the Owles, designating the regions on both sides of Clew Bay, now the baronies of Murrisk and Burris-hoole; the latter word also contains the name Umail.
122 Its height is 2510 feet. Mount Nephin, close to Lake Conn, is higher.
123 Carrick-on-Shannon.
124 He first went to a place called Duma Graid, and ordained there the arch-presbyter Ailbe, who resided at Shancoe (as mentioned above). It may be suspected that the name Duma Graid (for which we expect a modern Doogary) is preserved in Dockery’s Island, near the mouth of Lake Kilglass.
125 See note, Appendix B.
126 Tuatha De Danann, people of the goddess Danann. They are said, in the mythical history of Ireland, to have colonised the country and to have been conquered by the Milesians.
127 Fountain of Clebach.
128 See note, Appendix B.
129 See Appendix A, ii. 1.
130 See Appendix A, i. 4, on the tonsure question.
131 Selce has not been identified.
132 Kill-araght. From here Patrick may have revisited Mag Airthic and the Kerries.
133 Irrus Domnand, “the peninsula of Domnu” = barony of Erris in Mayo. Cp. Rhŷs, “Studies in Early Irish History,” p. 38.
134 Ballina.
135 It was one of the many Donaghmores, “great churches,” which Patrick is said to have founded. He consigned it to the care of Mucneus.
136 The name of a townland, in which there is an old churchyard and traces of ruins, to the right of the road from Ballina to Killala, a mile south of Killala. For Donaghmore and Mullaghfarry (farry = forrach = foirrgea, Tír. 327) see O’Donovan, Hy Fiachrach, pp. 466 and 467, notes.
137 See Appendix C, 8.
138 De laude sanctorum (Migne, Patr. Lat. xx.).
139 Jerome, Adversus Vigilantium, c. 5.
140 A.D. 440.
141 See above, chap. iii. p. 64.
142 For the evidence see Appendix C, 15.
143 It may be Ptolemy’s Regia (Ῥηγία). Cp. Rhŷs, “Studies in Early Irish History,” p. 49 (Proc. of British Acad. vol. i.).
144 See note, Appendix B.
145 The dimensions of these houses are given, Vit. Trip. p. 226:—“27 feet in the Great House, 17 feet in the kitchen, 7 feet in the oratory [aregal, supposed to be derived from oraculum]; and it was thus that he used always to found the congbala” [i.e. the sacred enclosures, or cloisters]. If these houses were circular, the numbers represent the diameters. For the topography of Armagh see the paper of Reeves, The Ancient Churches of Armagh (Lusk, 1860), with a plan. The locality of the first settlement, ubi nunc est Fertae martyrum, “the grave of the relics” (Muirchu, 290), he fixes, by means of the monastery of Temple-fertagh, which existed at the beginning of the seventeenth century, to the land south of Scotch St., near Scotch St. river (p. 10).
146 The two stages, first below, and then on the hill, are doubtless historical. We may conjecture that the second and final foundation is that which is recorded in the Annals, and that the first settlement had been made before the visit to Rome.
147 This is expressed by quantum habeo, “so far as it is mine,” in Muirchu, 292₃₁.
148 See note, Appendix B.
149 Ib.
150 There can be little question that the (contemporary) expression in provincia nostra in Ann. Ult., A.D. 443, means “in Ireland,” conceived as a single ecclesiastical province, like the province of a metropolitan.
151 Láthrach Patricc (Trip. 349₈). Cp. Reeves, Antiquities of Down and Connor, pp. 47 and 236; for Glore, ib. 87, 338; for Dunseveric, ib. 286. For Clogher and Ard-Patrick (Louth) see note, Appendix B.
152 Ep. against Corot. 375.
153 Ann. Ult., A.D. 439.
154 Or Killishea.
155 See note, Appendix B.
156 Áth Fithot, south of Tallow.
157 Old Kilcullen, south of (new) Kilcullen, in Co. Kildare.
158 See note, Appendix B.
159 Ib.
160 In barony of Slievemargy, in Queen’s County, a mile or so north-west of the town of Carlow.
161 The Life by Muirchu, see Appendix A, ii. 3.
162 See note, Appendix B.
163 Generally described inaccurately as the Acts of a Synod. The genuineness of the document is vindicated in Appendix A, 4.
164 For this sphere of Christian activity in the early Church see Harnack, Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums, p. 120.
165 A Christian who believes in a supernatural female form (lamia quae interpretatur striga) seen in a mirror is to be anathematised. One is reminded of
Was seh’ ich? Welch ein himmlisch Bild
Zeigt sich in diesem Zauberspiegel!
(Goethe, Faust, Part I.)
166 See Appendix A, i. 4.
167 Chap. iii. pp. 61 sqq.
168 Collection of Irish Canons, 20. 5. b (ed.² Wasserschleben, p. 61). For the possible date of the canon, and for some further illustration of the subject, see Appendix C, 16.
169 See Appendix C, 17.
170 Confession, 368₉.
171 Ib. 372₁₇; cp. 367₁₃.
172 Ib. 368₂₆.
173 Otto of Bamberg is said to have baptized 22,156 converts in Pomerania during his first journey! Mon. Prieflingensis, V. Ott. ii. 20; Ebbo, V. Ott. ii. 11.
174 Confession, 369₂₂.
175 Confession, 367₁₆.
176 Ib. 372. It may be conjectured, from the context, that this happened in Connaught.
177 So Otto of Bamberg used to distribute presents in Pomerania as a means of propagating Christianity, Herbord, Dial. 2. 7.
178 The question arises, Where did Patrick get his money? Did he inherit from his father? It is useless to ask.
179 Confession, 371₂₅.
180 See the anecdote in Tírechán, p. 303.
181 Epistles of Gregory, vi. 10 (A.D. 595), M.G.H. vol. i. p. 389.
182 Todd, St. Patrick, p. 154.
183 The early abbots of Hi (Iona) were almost entirely chosen from a branch of the family of Tirconnell (Reeves, Adamnan, genealogical table, p. 342).
184 See the bequest of Fith Fio in Lib. Arm. (Trip. 338). It is added that if there be no suitable person in the community of Drumlease, some one from Patrick’s community (Armagh, or any Patrician community?) should be chosen.
185 Corus Bescna, p. 73 (Ancient Laws of Ireland, vol. iii.).
186 Tírechán, 330₂₉, fecit alteram (aeclessiam) hi Tortena orientali in qua gens oThig Cirpani, sed libere semper. Cp. 321₇.
187 Additional Notices in Lib. Arm. (338₄, liberauit rex Deo et Patricio). The exact boundaries of the land are given, as if from the original document. Two interests were concerned here, that of Caichán and that of MacCairthin, and the land is described as “Caichán’s Fifth.” The two men are designated as flaith (lord) and aithech (tenant-farmer?), and they jointly devoted the land to ecclesiastical use.
188 Corus Bescna, p. 73.
189 Ib. p. 71.
190 Cp. Ancient Laws, iii., Introd. p. lxxii.
191 Ib. luii., Corus B. pp. 41, 43.
192 Ib. pp. 39-43.
193 Cp. Introd. pp. luiii. sqq.
194 See Appendix C, 18.
195 Todd, St. Patrick, 51 sqq.
196 See Appendix C, 17.
197 See above, chap. vii. p. 143.
198 It has twenty-one letters, a b c d e f g h i l m n o p q r s t u v, and ng (a guttural nasal, which occurs in the name Amolngaid; cp. the Greek double gamma). If the Goidels had originally invented an alphabet to suit their own language they would never have constructed this. They had to resort to various devices to represent their sounds by its means. See further note, Appendix B.
199 More strictly, a new letter was added, and u was differentiated into two, to represent its two sounds. It is as well to say that in describing the ogams as a cipher it is not intended to imply that they were cryptic, but only that they were not an independent alphabet.
200 For the Iberian alphabet see Hübner’s Monumenta linguae Ibericae (1893). Cp. Strabo, 3. 1. 6.
201 B.G. vi. 14.
202 Desjardins, Géographie de la Gaule, ii. 214, note 3.
203 Ail Clúade.
204 Milites.
205 Conf. 360₈.
206 Cp. Letter, ad init., inter barbaras itaque gentes habito proselitus et profuga.
207 Conf. 374₂₉. Compare 357₁₅.
208 Conf. 370₂. The passage 373₅₋₉ also supports the view in the text. In that passage the oldest MS. has ab aliquo uestro; and we should probably read uestrum with the later MSS.
209 Ib. 359₂.
210 Ib. 372₃₁.
211 See above, chap. iii. p. 53.
212 But see note, Appendix B.
213 See Appendix A, 5.
214 This is the theory of Professor Zimmer.
215 The Second Letter to the Corinthians seems to have been especially before him. This was natural. In it Paul was vindicating his character.
216 The legend will be found in Vit. Trip. pp. 112 sqq.
217 The old lists of the Armagh succession agree in assigning to Benignus ten years as bishop, so that, as Benignus died in 467 (Ann. Ult., sub anno), he would have succeeded in 457.
218 March 17.
219 Oirthir, not to be confounded with the kingdom of Oriel (Oirgéill), of which it formed the eastern portion.
220 Inundations are a recurring motive in the legends of the Island-plain. See the salt-marsh stories, above, p. 91.
221 This second incident can be shown to be a subsequent invention. See Appendix C, 19.
222 This story is also told by Muirchu, but not in immediate connexion with the story of the waggon and oxen seized by the men of Orior. It seems probable that the latter was suggested by the former. We meet the duplicate waggon and oxen in the Life of St. Abban (Colgan, Acta Sanctorum, i. March 16, cc. 41 sqq.), where the account of that saint’s death and burial and the struggle between the north and the south Leinster men is obviously borrowed from the stories about St. Patrick. Another story of wild bulls drawing a saint’s body to its tomb will be found in the Life of St. Melorus of Cornwall, Acta Sanctorum (Boll.), Jan. 1, vol. i. p. 136.
223 It is to be seen in the National Museum at Dublin. For the evidence as to the bell and the staff, see notes, Appendix B. For the copy of the gospels, which used falsely to be supposed to be his, see note, Appendix B, on chap. viii. p. 162.
224 This theory of Professor Zimmer is examined at length in Appendix C, 21.
225 Except in regard to Britain, and the British Church was similarly isolated.
226 De Cons. Stil. Lib. iii. l. 151.
227 Zimmer put forward the theory that the original Confession contained more biographical details than our texts (Celtic Church, p. 50). See my criticism showing that his argument has no basis (Eng. Hist. Review, xviii., July 1903, pp. 544-6).
228 St. Patrick, p. 347.
229 Councils, ii. p. 296, note a.
230 Celtic Church, ib.
231 Bury, ib.
232 Huc usque uolumen quod Patricius manu conscripsit sua: septima decima Martii die translatus est Patricius ad caelos.
233 Sixth century or not much later, because the writings of Muirchu and Tírechán attest its existence in the second half of the seventh century.
234 The attempt of Pflugk-Harttung (Die Schriften S. Patricks, in Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher, p. 71 sqq., 1893) to prove the Confession and Letter spurious is a piece of extraordinarily bad criticism. He designates the Liber Armachanus as “Irlands pseudoisidorische Fälschung.”
235 Now fully admitted by Zimmer, who formerly doubted it.
236 iteneris A.
237 terreno A.
238 requissistis A (with sign of query, Z, in margin).
239 paradissum A.
240 aeclessia A.
241 Curie A.
242 = ἐλέησον.
243 It may be well to translate this sentence. “Church of the Scots, nay of the Romans, in order that ye may be Christians as well as Romans, it behoves that there should be chanted in your churches (uobiscum) at every hour of prayer the Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison.” Compare Mr. Jenkinson in the Academy, Aug. 11, 1888.
244 aeclessia A.
245 See Tírechán, p. 302.
246 The assumption that all these details are taken from the book is confirmed by the one explicit exception. The sojourn in the insula Aralanensis is given on the oral authority of Bishop Ultan (302₂₄). This was evidently Ultan’s explanatory comment on the text in insolis, etc.
247 In a paper on Muirchu in the Guardian, Nov. 27, 1901.
248 It may be pointed out that the small number of the dicta—three, or more probably two—is in favour of their genuineness.
249 Since writing this, I observe that the same thing struck Loofs (De ant. Brit. Scot.que eccl. p. 50). He held the Dicta to be genuine, admitting the possibility of later additions. So too B. Robert, Étude crit. sur la vie et l’œuvre de St-Patrick (1883), p. 74.
250 This is also shown by the addition of Christe eleison, as Mr. Brightman has pointed out to me. Cp. Gregory the Great, Ep. ix. 12. Milan is also excluded; the Milanese only use Kyrie. I have had the advantage of communicating with Mr. Brightman on the subject; otherwise I should hardly have ventured to deal with it, as I have no liturgical knowledge.
251 So the missionary Boniface insists on the necessity of synods and canonica iura in a letter to Pope Zacharias (Ep. 50, p. 299, ed. Duemmler in M.G.H. Epp. iii.).
252 Bradshaw has clearly distinguished two recensions of the collection, which he designates as the A-text and the B-text. Theodore’s Penitential is the latest work quoted in the A-text, Adamnan’s Canons the latest in the B-text. See Bradshaw’s letter to Wasserschleben in Wasserschleben’s edition of the Canons, p. lxx.
253 Spelman i. 59 sq., Haddan and Stubbs, ii. 333 sqq.
254 The canons which are cited in the Valicellane only are marked by square brackets. The list of correspondences in Haddan and Stubbs, ii. 333, a, is incomplete.
255 See Haddan and Stubbs, ii. 333, a.
256 1. 8. b; 5. 2; 6. 2. b (two MSS. give Sin. Rom., one Sin. Rom. siue Kartagin., the rest Sin. Kartagin.); 7. 3. a; 20. 3. b; 40. 13. a; 46. 35. c; 46. 38. a, b; 47. 12. b; 47. 12. c; 47. 20; 66. 19. a. There is another case of Syn. Rom. uel Kart. in one MS.; 9. 1. a. The quotation from Pope Symmachus, Ep. ad Caes. ep. Arel. c. 1, under the title Regula canonica Romana in 17. 8 may stand on a different footing.
257 14. 2. c; 17. 7. b; 17. 9. b; 18. 2. a; 20. 3. a; 20. 3. c; 20. 5. a; 21. 2; 33. 1. f; 35. 4. c; 41. 6. a and b; 42. 7; 42. 25. a; 45. 13; 45. 14; 46. 29; 52. 2; 52. 3; 52. 6; 56. 4. a; 66. 16. To these may be added three other items: 20. 6. a, institutio Romana; 28. 5. b and 33. 4, disputatio Romana. Also 42. 23 Sinodus Romana, but the chapter is found only in one MS.; and in 3. 4 one MS. has an additional quotation from Synodus Romanorum. I do not include 42. 24, because the heading eadem sinodus may be referred to the heading of c. 22 Sinodus Hibernensis, and not to the heading of 23 Sinodus Romana, which, as I have mentioned, is found in only one MS. (Sangallensis).
258 Here are the two sections:—
e. Sinodus Romana: Omnis qui fraudat debitum fratris ritu gentilium excommunis sit donec reddiderit. f. Item: Qua fronte rogas a Deo debitum tibi dimitti cum debitum proximi tui non reddidisti?
259 It may be observed that in the Valicellane MS. we find some instances of Hibernensis uel Romana; 33. 4, 6, and 9.
260 11. 1. b; 20. 5. b; 21. 12; 21. 6. b; 25. 3; 25. 4; 29. 7; 37. 27; 37. 29; 42. 26. b; 44. 9; 46. 32. b; 47. 11. b; 67. 2. d. Of these 37. 29 has the curious heading Sinodus totius mundi et Patricius decreuit (with the variants Sinodus Hibernensis et Pat. decr., and simply Sinodus Hibernensis).
261 21. 25 occurs only in one MS., 37. 6 in two.
262 25. 3 and 4.
263 In Ware’s S. Patricio... adscripta Opuscula (London, 1656, a rare little volume), pp. 85-7. See below, p. 245.
264 “Brit. ecc. ant.,” in Opera, vol. vi. p. 491. The same view was urged by Varin. But neither Ussher nor Varin gave positive proof.
265 It is officially recognised in the 40th canon of the Fourth Council of Toledo, A.D. 633.
266 Cp. the 15th canon of Nicaea, Mansi, ii. 200.
267 So too in the Hibernensis, i. 22, a and c.
268 Fastes épiscopaux de l’ancienne Gaule, vol. i. p. 41.
269 Cp. also canon 27 of the Council of Hippo, A.D. 393 (Mansi, iii. 923): ut episcopi non proficiscantur trans mare nisi consulto primae sedis episcopo suae cuiusque prouinciae, ut ab eo praecipue possint formatas sumere.
270 Printed by Pamelius in his edition of Cyprian; by Ware in his Opuscula of St. Patrick (1656); by Migne, P.L. 40, 649 sqq.
271 For his alleged relationship see below, p. 292.
272 To this rule the MSS. present two exceptions, which should be corrected: v. 70, praeuidit, which has been corrected to praeuidet (cp. Atkinson, Lib. Hymn. ii. 13), and v. 66, qui ornatur uestimento nuptiale indūtus, where we ought evidently to read inclŭtus.
273 311₂₉, Rolls ed.
274 Ann. Ult. s.a.
275 314₂₈; Ann. Ult. s.aa.
276 See Bury, Tírechán’s Memoir of St. Patrick (Eng. Hist. Rev. April 1902), p. 255.
277 Ib. pp. 237, 238, 260.
278 311₂₃₋₂₅. Cp. Bury, ib. 261.
279 311-312.
280 Bury, ib. 258. “His whole book is a practical service to the cause of the claims of Armagh. It is virtually a list of the churches which claimed to have been founded by Patrick. If it had been completed, it would have exhibited the full extent of the paruchia Patricii.”
281 313₂₇, 307₇, 313₂₈, 323₂₉, 319₅, 318₂₅ × 301₉.
282 311₂₈.
283 In libro apud Ultanum, 302₃.
284 Bury, Tírechán’s Memoir, 248-250.
285 Bury, Tírechán’s Memoir, 239.
286 319₄. Bury, “Supplementary Notes” (Eng. Hist. Rev. Oct. 1902), 702-703.
287 It stops at p. 331, l. 9, in the Rolls ed. See my paper in E.H.R. ut cit. p. 237.
288 Proc. of R.I.A. (xxiv. sect. C, 3), 1903, p. 164 sqq.
289 This has been fully recognised by Dr. Gwynn, loc. cit.
290 Machia (330₂₂) probably means Domnach Maigen, not Armagh (Gwynn, loc. cit.).
291 348₁₈, d.g. [= Duma Graid, Reeves, but this is far from certain]; Ailbe i Senchui altáre; and Machet Cetchen Rodán Mathona. Compare also 350₈ with 331₄.
292 The credibility of the Genealogy, as an independent record, is particularly strong; the Ballymote scribe was acquainted with the Tripartite, and quotes from it à propos of the sons of Forat, notwithstanding the contradiction. The discrepancy with the Patrician tradition is, in fact, a guarantee that the record is trustworthy.
293 P. 269₁₃ Rolls ed.: patris mei Coguitosi, the brilliant correction of Bishop Graves for the corrupt cognito si in A. On the passage, and on Cogitosus, see his paper in the Proceedings R.I.A. viii. 269 sqq.
294 See Graves, ib. The conjecture is accepted by Dr. Stokes (Trip. Life, 269, note 2).
295 Colgan, Acta SS. p. 465 and n. 31.
296 Ann. Ult. s.a.
297 See Reeves, Adamnan, pp. l. li. Professor Kuno Meyer has just published an old Irish treatise on the “Law of Adamnan” passed at this synod (“Cáin Adamnáin,” in Anecdota Oxoniensia, 1905). The document contains a list of the bishops, abbots, and kings present at the synod which was held at Birr. Muirchu appears (p. 18): Murchu maccúi Machthéine. Muirchu appears in the Martyrologies under June 8 (see Calendar of Oengus, ed. Stokes, p. xciii.).
298 I suggested this in the Guardian, Nov. 20, 1901, p. 1615, c. 2.
299 Muirchu does not name his father’s work, but his expression ingenioli mei (269₁₄) may be an echo of the rusticus sermo ingenioli mei in the prologue to the Vita Brigidae.
300 271₁₇.
301 269₁₉.
302 This is suggested by the use of the third person. In the Preface Muirchu writes in the first person. The note is similar to the note which is prefixed to the memoir of Tírechán and is obviously due to a copyist.
303 See 495₃ Rolls ed. (ad Britanias nauigauit), and 495₂₆₋ (the second captivity).
304 Some mistakes have occurred in the course of compilation and transmission: see below, p. 348.
305 See Bury, Tírechán’s Memoir of St. Patrick, p. 16; but I did not see then that the source was probably Irish.
306 Tírechán, 330₁₅₋₁₉: Muirchu, 276₁₁₋₁₄, and 300₁₀₋₁₃: Bury, ib. p. 14.
307 “The Tradition of Muirchu’s Text,” in Hermathena, xxviii. pp. 199 sqq.
308 On account of the notice of Auxilius (of Killossy) and Iserninus (of Kilcullen). It seems very probable that the notice of Iserninus in the Liber Arm. (f. 18) may have been derived from information furnished by Bishop Aed on the occasion of his visit to Armagh. See above p. 253.
309 In the Table of Contents to Book II. this is the title of the first and the last section alike; but the last item in the table was wrongly taken to be a heading of sect. 1 (though there are no other headings to the sections), until the true explanation was pointed out by Dr. Gwynn.
310 Ann. Ult. s.a.
311 This is the conjecture of Zimmer, Celtic Church, p. 81.
312 These parts were first published by Rev. E. Hogan, Anal. Boll. vol. i. I have had the advantage of using a photograph of the MS., kindly given me by Dr. Gwynn.
313 See also Todd, St. Patrick, 489; Stokes, Intr. to Tripartite, cxi. sq.; Bernard and Atkinson, Liber Hymnorum, ii. 175-6.
314 Criticised by Thurneysen, Revue celtique, 6, 326 sqq., who rejects the theory of interpolation except in the case of stanza 17. So too Stokes and Strachan.
315 The stanzas which are abnormal, or defective, in metre, assonance, etc., are—2, 7, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 33 (for criticisms on their subject-matter see Atkinson, ib. xliii. sqq.). Stanza 16 has a “glossatorial” character (ib. xlviii.). The ejection of 10 on ground of subject-matter may be confirmed by the abnormal endings (nua and tua, cp. Atkinson, xlii.). 18 (rejected by Zimmer and Atkinson) is clearly an imitation of 18, and this is indicated by the repetition of the rhymes. The rejection of 19 and 20 depends on the subject-matter, and 21 repeats 19. The irrelevance of 22 is obvious. I leave the second stanza as doubtful, for though there is a metrical anomaly (daec a disyllable), there is no objection on the ground of the subject-matter; but it could be dispensed with.
316 Cp. Muirchu, 296₁₂.
317 See Bury, Guardian, Nov. 27, 1901, p. 1647.
318 There is no other edition.
319 I have shown, from misunderstandings in V₄ that its author was ignorant of Irish, while the author of V₂ was an Irishman (op. cit. 197).
320 Dr. W. Levison of Bonn kindly called my attention to a Vita preserved at St. Omer which proves to be a copy of the Vita Secunda different from that used by Colgan. It is contained in Cod. 716 (Legendarium beatae Mariae de Claromarisco), a book of the thirteenth century, vol. ii. ff. 155-9. For the text of Vita Quarta, the Stowe MS. 105A (Brit. Mus.) is important (see my Tradition, etc., p. 186 note).
321 Except so far as to show that neither of the two existing MSS. was used by Colgan. The text is based on Rawlinson B. 512, but it is not explained why this was chosen as the basis in preference to Egerton 93 (which—I speak under correction—does not seem inferior).
322 Ann. Ult. s.a.
323 Ib.
324 The Tripartite Life of St. Patrick, in Trans. of R.I.A., xxix. Pt. vi. 1889.
325 A scribe of Armagh, ob. 725 (Ann. Ult.).
326 Ann. Ult. s.a.
327 The narrative here (c. 14) is very confused, and perhaps there is interpolation.
328 I observe that Lanigan wished to derive Hermon from her, “great,” and maen, “rock.”—Todd, St. Patrick, 337 note.
329 The literature which I have used in working through the Nennian problem is as follows:—Zimmer, Nennius Vindicatus, a brilliant and indispensable book, but too ingenious, and full of wiredrawn arguments; many of the conclusions have been upset by the Chartres text (Mommsen’s Z) which Zimmer left out of consideration. This text was published by Duchesne, Nennius retractatus, in Revue celtique, xv. 173 sqq.; and was used by Mommsen for his authoritative edition of the work in Chronica Minora, vol. iii. (it is much to be regretted that he did not devote a separate column to printing the text of Z in full). New light was then thrown on the problem by Thurneysen, Ztsch. f. deutsche Philologie, xxviii. 80 sqq. His interpretation of exberta in the title in the Chartres MS. as a mistake for excerpta (Incipiunt excerpta filii Urbagen) seems probable (Dr. Traube’s emendation experta has not convinced me); his identification of this son of Urbagen with Run map Urbgen, who baptized the Northumbrians in 627 (Hist. Britt. c. 63), though plausible, cannot be considered certain. Duchesne, in a judicious and instructive criticism with reference to Mommsen’s edition and Thurneysen’s article, has summed up the conclusions which may safely be drawn from the data: Revue celtique, xvii. 1 sqq. Mr. E. W. B. Nicholson, who had reached several of Professor Thurneysen’s conclusions independently, published his views in Ztsch. f. celtische Philologie, iii. 104 sqq. The most important point in this paper is that the true reading of the important words in the title of the Chartres MS. is: exberta fili vrba gen. See also L. Traube in Neues Archiv, xxiv. 721 sqq.
330 Nennius, Preface, ed. Momms., p. 143; Elbodug died A.D. 809, Zimmer, Nenn. Vind. 51.
331 (1) Noteworthy is the explanation of sed prohibuit illum Deus quia nemo etc. (Muirchu 272₂₀) by the insertion of per quasdam tempestates after Deus. In the context this is incongruous, and it can hardly have been originated by Nennius. Had he a MS. of Muirchu containing additions inserted from Muirchu’s source? [Deus is in the Bruxellensis, but omitted in the Armachanus.] (2) He changes Muirchu’s Victoricus into Victor angelus Dei. (3) He says that Patrick’s first name was Maun (Magonus, Tírechán, 302₅). (4) It is to be observed that while Muirchu mentions two views as to the duration of Patrick’s sojourn with Germanus, namely, forty or thirty years, Nennius gives a much smaller period, per annos septem. Thus Muirchu’s Life does not explain Nennius, c. 52; he had some additional material.
Nennius agrees with Brux, and V₂ V₄ in recording that Palladius died in terra Pictorum.
332 Todd Lecture, Series iii. The Codex Palatino-Vaticanus, 830, p. 354 sqq., cp. 252 sqq.
333 Ib. 247 sqq.
334 Cp. Columbanus, Epist. (M.G.H., Epp. iii.) 157, and the notice in the Würzburg MS. of St. Matthew, quoted by Zimmer, Nenn. Vind. 252, note (Scheps, Die ältesten Evangelienhandschriften der Würzburger Bibliothek, 27).
335 A genealogy of Brito is ascribed by Gilla Coemgin to senior nobilis Guanach, and Todd pointed out that the reference was to the Liber Cuanach (Zimmer, Nenn. Vind. 250-1). Calling attention to the notice in Ann. Ult. s.a. 616, usque hunc annum scripsit Isidorus cronicon suum, Zimmer observes that the old recension (up to 616) of Isidore’s chronicle was known in Ireland, and conjectures that its arrival may have been the stimulus which prompted the work of Cuana.
336 An older authority, Maucteus, was quoted by Cuana (Ann. Ult. s.a. 471).
337 Dr. MacCarthy quotes appropriately the 20th canon of the Council of Milevi, A.D. 416.
338 See Migne, P.L. 87, 969.
339 For such entries in the blank spaces of a Paschal Table, compare, e.g. the Paschale Campanum (Chron. Min., ed. Mommsen, i. 745 sqq.).
340 Mr. Phillimore’s suggestion that cum is a misrendering of the Old-Welsh cant = by, seems improbable, as the notice is not likely to be a translation. I should say that cum is simply a dittogram of the last syllable of dominicum, and has ousted a.
341 We are indeed enabled to infer that before the tenth century A.D. 457 had been maintained by some to be the date of Patrick’s death.
342 An examination of the dates in the sixth century suggests that the entries of contemporary events did not begin before the seventh. Certainly the erroneous date of the battle of Mons Badonis was a late insertion.
343 For references see Tillemont, Mémoires, xv. 769. Leo had taken the step of writing to the Emperor Marcian on the matter in 453.
344 Vit. Hilarii. Arel. 16. See Levison, Neues Archiv, xxix. p. 99.
345 Levison, loc. cit. pp. 125 sqq.
346 Compare Zimmer’s criticism, Celtic Church, 64-5.
347 Stokes (Urkeltischer Sprachschatz, 198) and Rhŷs seek a Celtic etymology for Magonus. Rhŷs treats it as a derivation from Goidelic magus (whence the Irish mug, “servant”), meaning perhaps originally a “boy.”
348 His day was Nov. 27; Mart. of Donegal, p. 319.
349 Dichu of Saul appears in the Martyrology of Donegal under April 29 (p. 114).
350 Instances are collected by Professor Rhŷs in Proceedings of R.S.A.I. Pt. i. vol. xxxii. p. 5; to which add the Donard stone (ib. Pt. ii. vol. xxxiii. p. 114).
351 This comes from Muirchu’s Irish source for the legend. See above, App. A, ii. 3.
352 For scriptum erat I would read scriptum quod scriptum erat.
353 sine honore, supposed to mean “without recognition of my episcopal title.”
354 male uidimus faciem designati nudato nomine (365₂₉). This gives much better sense than the ordinary rendering, which refers designati to Patrick, and nud. nom. to the suppression of the episcopal title. I observe that Mr. White, though he does not adopt it in his translation, gives it as an alternative interpretation in his note.
355 Another petition (which in V. Trip., p. 116, appears in connexion with Mount Crochan) is added in V₃, c. 88. See Bury, Trans. of R.I.A. xxxii. C. Part iii. p. 223.
356 I retract the date “c. A.D. 850” in my note †, op. cit. p. 218. I have abandoned a view of the relations of the Nennian MSS. which prompted me to assign this date.
357 The Armagh tradition, connecting Columba with St. Patrick’s tomb, is referred to in the Additions to Tírechán (see Appendix C, 19).
358 I have shown that this was possibly the original corruption, “Tradition of Muirchu’s Text,” p. 196.
359 haut has been restored for -cha ut of the Brussels MS. The restoration, obviously right, is borne out by Probus (Colgan, Trias Thaum. 47), who here transcribes Muirchu. See Stokes, ad loc.
360 Probus here, using another but related MS. of Muirchu, gives Nentriae prouinciae.
361 Mr. Nicholson’s explanation that it is a corruption of Britanniae will hardly be accepted. Palaeographically it has no probability; it was hardly necessary, and we should rather expect Britanniarum.
362 It is obvious how readily the corruption rose from bannauētabernie or -urnie.
363 Stokes, Tripartite, Introduction, p. cxxxvii. He refers to Gregory of Tours, Hist. Franc. x. 28, in uico Nemptudoro. Skene (Celtic Scotland, ii. 436, n.) identifies Nemthur with Neutur in the Black Book of Caermarthen (Four Ancient Books of Wales, vol. ii. p. 3).
364 It is perhaps hardly necessary to observe that Ammianus when he says that Theodosius instaurabat urbes does not refer to Valentia (which he has not yet mentioned) in particular, but to Britain in general.
365 In A.D. 383 he was sent on an embassy to the Persians (whom Keller calls “Parthians,” p. 15), and married Serena soon after (384 or 385). In A.D. 386 he was engaged in the campaign with the Gruthungi.
366 This seems to me a just remark of Mr. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, vol. i. (2nd ed.), p. 716.
367 “Tyrants of Britain, Gaul, and Spain,” Eng. Hist. Review, 1886, i. 55, note 3. This is the chief study on the subject (republished in Western Europe in the Fifth Century, 1905, chaps. ii., iii.). Cp. App. 20 to Bury’s edition of Gibbon, vol. iii.
368 II. k. Jan. ed. Mommsen, p. 465.
369 Prosper’s notice, sub ann. 407, agrees with the implication in Olympiodorus.
370 Preface to edition of Gildas (Chron. Min. iii. 1), p. 7.
371 The Picts are described as a gens transmarina (the Picts of Dalaradia?).
372 Ann. Ult. sub a. 461.
373 Ann. Inisf. ed. O’Conor sub a. (“488” =) 493: anno ccccxxxii a passione Domini.
374 Ed. Mommsen, p. 158-9.
375 Rolls ed. p. 365₁₅, nescio, Deus scit, si habebam tunc annos quindecim.
376 Ib.₁₁.
377 366₁₀.
378 365₁₀.
379 So it is interpreted by Todd, St. Patrick, p. 392; by Neander, Allg. Geschichte der christlichen Religion u. Kirche, iii. 185, note; by Zimmer, Celtic Church, p. 43.
380 I adopt the admirable correction of Dr. N. J. D. White for occasionum—inuenerunt me (MSS.).
381 The truth is that the length of time which elapsed since the wrongdoing is not pertinent. The point is the interval between the confession of it to his friend, who offered no obstacle to his ordination as deacon (nor later to his ordination as bishop), and the occasion on which it was used against him. It is this lapse of 30 years which makes his friend’s conduct so unaccountable.
382 It is interesting to note that this name is found on three ogam stones, in the genitive forms Gosoctas, Gossucttias, and Gosocteas (see Rhŷs, Ogam-inscribed Stones, in reprint from Proc. of Royal Soc. of Antiquaries of Ireland, Part i. vol. xxxii. 1902, p. 24).
383 The force of adhuc here (not synonymous with iterum) is exactly like its force in adhuc capturam dedi. See above, Appendix B, note on p. 34.
384 Muirchu’s et erat annorum triginta (496₁) must not be alleged; it is based on a misconception of the annos triginta of the Confession (365₁₀), and influenced by the Scriptural parallel to which Muirchu refers.
385 Jerome, Ep. cxxiii. (ad Ageruchiam), Migne’s ed. vol. i. 1057-8.
386 After A.D. 439.
387 vii. § 50. Orosius, vii. 38 and 40, gives no details of the devastations.
388 Edited by Brandes in the Corp. Script. Eccl. 1889.
389 Compare the sketch of Professor Dill, based on these poems, in Roman Society, bk. iv. cap. 2 (p. 263, ed. 1).
390 So I would amend the corrupt metuendis. Ellis reads tetricis, and suggests mediis. But there is greater point in nudis; it implies “without the crops, etc., which would naturally attract an enemy.”
391 P. 18.
392 Pp. 16-18, and Appendix B.
393 Cp. Arrian’s Cynegeticus, esp. chaps. 1, 2, 3.
394 The nature of the cargo is another argument against the view that Britain was the destination.
395 Annis xxx. Tír. loc. cit. The numeral is less probably a mistake for iii. than the result of a mistaken attempt to account for the chronology of Patrick’s life on the hypothesis that he lived to the age of 120. Other schemes assigned 30 or 40 years to the Auxerre period (Muirchu, 271₂₂).
396 For the traditions and legends connecting Palladius with Scotland see Skene, Celtic Scotland, ii. 29 sqq.
397 Schoell, De ecclesiasticae Britonum Scotorumque historiae fontibus, 1851, p. 77; Loofs, De antiqua Britonum Scotorumque ecclesia, p. 51 (1882). Compare B. Robert’s criticisms on their arguments, Étude critique, etc., pp. 28 sqq.
398 Professor Zimmer (Early Celtic Church, p. 38) regards Palladius as a Roman rendering of Patrick’s name Sucatus (warlike), following a suggestion of Mr. O’Brien (Irish. Eccl. Record, 1887, pp. 723 sqq.). This is quite unconvincing, in the absence of any evidence that Palladius was a Briton. Why should he not have belonged to the stirps Palladiorum of Bourges (Apoll. Sidon. Epp. vii. 9, 24)? Cp. Duchesne, Fastes épisc. ii. p. 26, note.
399 P. cxxv. ed. Stokes (1871). This calendar, Mr. Stokes has shown, cannot be earlier than the end of the tenth century.
400 The name of Palladius does not appear in any Irish calendar of saints. It appears under July 6 in the Breviary of Aberdeen. See Todd, St. Patrick, p. 299.
401 Cp. Chron. Scot. pp. 24-25; Cormac’s Glossary sub Mogheime.
402 M. d’Arbois de Jubainville has a note on Sen Patrick in Revue celtique, ix. p. 111 sqq. He thinks a second Patricius came over to Ireland as a mere name in a copy of the Hieronymian Martyrology towards end of sixth century; and that of him were made the two Patricks of August 24 in Mart. of Tallaght.
403 See Bury, “Tradition of Muirchu’s Text,” p. 205.
404 The name of this place, whether in the form Ebmoria (Lib. Arm.) or in the variant form Euboria (for the variants see Bury, “Tradition of Muirchu’s Text,” p. 185) is unknown. The context shows that it lay between Auxerre and the north coast of Gaul. Ebroica = Evreux would be my guess. (It probably became the seat of a bishop before the end of the fifth century, but probably not long before. Cp. Duchesne, Fastes ép. ii. 226).
405 On the evidence for this date see note 15 in my “Sources of Early Patrician Documents” (E.H.R., July 1904), where I refer to the discussion of Dr. W. Levison in his monograph cited above, Appendix A, i. 7.
406 Nennius Vindicatus, p. 123, note. Later compilers divided Amatho rege. In Irish conditions a rex episcopus would not sound so strange as in Gaul, though I do not know of an instance before Cormac of Cashel at the beginning of the tenth century. In Tripartite Life (p. 34) we get a further step in the evolution; the bishop appears as Amatho rí Románach (King of the Romans); and the final stage is reached when Patrick is ordained coram Teodosio imperatore.
407 I pointed out this inference in “Sources of Early Patrician Documents” (cit. sup.).
408 Ann. Ult. s.a. 439. For the separate coming of Iserninus see account in Lib. Arm. f. 18 rᵒ a (342, Rolls ed.). It is there indeed supposed that they started at the same time from Gaul, but were severed by storms, and so arrived separately in Ireland. The motive for this tale is evidently the genuine record that they did not come together.
409 There are three cases (Zimmer, ib. 24-26):
1. Long ō instead of long ā: e.g. trindōit (= trinitatem); altōir (= altāre); caindlōir (candelarius); notlaic (nātalicia); popa (papa). If the Latin forms had come directly to Ireland, the ā would have been preserved; ō for ā is characteristically British.
2. c for p: casc (pascha); crubthir (presbyter). Words of this kind must have been “interpreted to the Irish by British mouths,” for if they had been borrowed from Latin, p would have been preserved. The motive for the change of British p to c in the loan-words was the observed fact that in native words Gaelic c corresponded to British p (representing the velar q). The treatment of Patrick’s name is a significant instance. From its British form we get in Irish Coithrige, from its Latin form Patraicc. Caille, a veil (caillech, a nun), is supposed to be another case (= pallium). Mr. Nicholson suggests that it is Celtic, = capillia (Keltic Researches, p. 104).
3. sr for fr, sl for fl: e.g. slechtan (flectionem), srogell (flagellum). In case of a direct borrowing, sr, sl would have been kept; but coming through British they were treated on the analogy of Irish sruth = Br. frut.
410 Tracia being an error for Frācia.
411 The prose list in the Book of Ballymote describes both Duachs as Tenga Uma (and as slain by Muirchertach), but in the case of the first Duach Galach is written above.
412 Dai Galach is mentioned as Brian’s youngest son, and destined to reign in Connaught, in the text printed, with translation, by Dr. W. Stokes, from the Yellow Book of Lecan (col. 898), concerning the sons of Eochaid Muigmedoin, in Rev. Celt. xxiv. (1903), p. 182.
413 The notice is discussed by Todd, St. Patrick, pp. 469-70, but he does not attempt any explanation of probatus est, and by omitting the first part of the notice altogether he shows that he did not apprehend the significant association of the probatio with Leo.
414 Nostra provincia is ecclesiastical Ireland, or north Ireland—not a particular district or kingdom.
415 The Vit. Trip. (Part 3, p. 238) places the visit to Rome after the foundation of Armagh. This order seems to be simply an inference from the fact that the relics which Patrick got at Rome were brought to Armagh.
416 The references are to Gundlach’s ed., Epp. Mer. et Kar. Aeui, vol. i.
417 Mr. Warren rightly rejects the pregnant meaning found in this passage by Döllinger (Liturgy and Ritual, p. 39).
418 difficiles is in three MSS., including the Coloniensis (eighth century): it is clearly wanted, and (if there was not some stronger and fuller phrase in the original canon) it has a very pregnant meaning.
419 I believe that the silence of Cummian in his letter to Segéne (Migne, P.L. 87, 970) has been urged as an objection to the authenticity of the canon. But the argument from silence in such a case as this has no cogency. It is quite possible that he was not aware of the canon.
420 See B. Krusch, Der 84jährige Ostercyclus und seine Quellen, 1880.
421 Columbanus, Epp. ed. Gundlach, Ep. 4, p. 162.
422 Ib. Ep. 1 (to Gregory I.), p. 157; Catal. Sanct. Hib., unum Pascha, quarta decima luna post aequinoctium vernale (H. and S., Councils, ii. 292, 293).
423 Dr. MacCarthy’s explanation (Introd. to Annals of Ulster, iv. p. lxxix) of an entry in the Chronicle of Marius Aventicensis (ad ann. A.D. 560), as implying a survival of the old 84 cycle in Gaul, does not seem tenable (see A. Anscombe, Z. f. Celtische Philologie, iv. p. 333).
424 I have omitted all reference to the abstruse technique of the computations, and the question as to the difference between the two cycles of 84 (differing in the number of the saltus), for which see MacCarthy, op. cit. pp. lxv. sqq.; Krusch, op. cit.
425 For dating, see MacCarthy, op. cit. cxl. cxli.
426 Migne, Patrol. 87, 969.
427 Krusch, 302 sqq. For dating, see MacCarthy, op. cit. cxvii., where the proof of fabrication will be found.
428 So MacCarthy, cxxxvii., note 2.
429 Dr. MacCarthy shows that Cummian was uncritical (cxl.), but I cannot go quite so far as he. He accepts, as genuine tradition, the statement that Patrick brought a cycle with him (rightly observing that the addition of et fecit cannot be pressed), but holds that it was identical with the Celtic cycle of later times. It is with much diffidence that I venture to differ from him on this point; but I owe it to his investigations that I have been able to reach a definite conclusion.
430 The learned Appendix A, pp. 123 sqq., in Reeves, Eccl. Ant., is valuable still.
431 Ed. Gundlach, M.G.H., Epp. Mer. et Kar. Aeui, i. p. 163. See Jerome, Ep. 58 (Migne, 22, 583).
432 450 in Tírechán and one MS. of Catal. Sanctorum; 350 in other MSS. of Cat. Sanct.
433 It is not, of course, certain that Bishop Muirethachus qui fuit super flumen Bratho, for whom Patrick and Bronus wrote an alphabet, is identical with the epscop Muiredaig, “an aged man of Patrick’s household,” who is said in Vit. Trip., p. 134, to have been left by Patrick in Cell Alaid. The foundation of Cell Alaid is not mentioned by Tírechán.
434 The text of Tírechán leaves it doubtful whether the foundation of Cellola Tog was laid under Patrick’s auspices, and whether Patrick ordained Cainnech bishop. He is not included in the author’s catalogue of bishops ordained by Patrick (p. 304).
435 For the monachi of Assicus, see 313₃₃ and 328₃₀.
436 Cainnech was a monachus Patricii, 324₁₃. Another mon. P. is mentioned 329₉. The deacon Coimanus of Ardd Licce seems to have been another, 317₂₆. Gengen and Sannuch are described as mon. P. 305₁₇; and for the foreigners Conleng and Ercleng, see 313₁₂.
437 Thus Slébte, the seat of Bishop Fíacc, would have been a civitas. It is called Slebtiensis civitas by Muirchu (271₁₉). See also Lib. Angeli, 355, omnis aeclessia libera et civitas <quae> ab episcopali gradu uidetur esse fundata. Cp. an Irish canon, ascribed to Patrick, in the Hibernensis, 29, c. 7 (p. 101 ed. Wasserschl.), aut a sancta ecclesia aut in civitate intus.
438 326₂₁, quia deus dixit illi ut legem relinquerent [?—et, as Stokes suggests] et episcopos ordinaret ibi, et prespiteros et diaconos in illa regione. This suggests, though it does not necessitate, the inference in the text.
439 Senchus Mór, i. 40. See also the following passages: i. 54 (a false-judging king and a stumbling bishop are placed on a level); i. 78, the king’s testimony is valid against all except the man of learning, the bishop, and the pilgrim.
440 In his treatment of the Muirchu narrative Todd does not go below the surface, but he recognises that the first part embodies a concession on the part of Armagh. The question is discussed in Reeves, Eccl. Antiquities, 223 sq.
441 The simplest case is when an incident is reduplicated, as in the Cyclops story in the Odyssey (Book 9), where the second stone-casting of the Cyclops at the escaping ship is a later addition by an expander who sought to outdo the original incident but failed in his effect.
442 I may note here that the river Cabcenne, where the Orior men discovered the deception, has not been identified, but ought naturally to be sought near their destination, Armagh. So Todd, p. 195.
443 In his article “Keltische Kirche” in the Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie u. Kirche, 1901; translated by Miss Meyer (The Celtic Church in Britain and Ireland), 1902.
444 In Bede’s Martyrology, under March 17, we find in Scotia S. Patricii Confessionis. Zimmer (p. 10) accepts this, without question, as Bedan. I should like to know how far we can distinguish in this document what is Bede’s from later additions.
445 There is, however, another consideration which may be taken into account by those who wonder at the absence of any reference to Patrick in Bede’s Ecclesiastical History. The Latin literature concerning St. Patrick only began to appear in Bede’s time. Tírechán’s Memoir cannot have been written long before his birth; and he was nearly thirty years old when Muirchu’s Life was composed. The older Patrician literature, as we have seen reason to believe, was in Irish, and inaccessible to Bede. The Columban church in north Britain was not concerned to propagate the fame of Patrick. There was rivalry between the Columban and Patrician communities in Ireland (cp. Tírechán, 314₈).
446 As I observed above (p. 262) if Muirchu’s work were anonymous and nothing were said of Aed, we should never suspect that the author belonged to the south of Ireland; we should certainly connect him with north Ireland.
447 The particular passage on which Zimmer relies—the only positive evidence—is in the “Additions” to Tírechán in the Liber Armachanus (p. 332, Rolls ed.), where Palladius is said to have been called Patricius alio nomine, but is distinguished from the second Patrick. But this can be otherwise explained. The double date of Patrick’s death (see Appendix C, 7) led to a duplication—a first and a second Patrick, and one attempt to fix the personality of the earlier Patrick was to identify him with Palladius.