Vennicni, Feni and Donegal

Vennicni, Feni and Donegal

In this article I will be exploring the terms Vennicni, Feni and Gwynedd in relation to the early medieval tribes of Donegal, particularly the Cenel Conaill and examine the legend of the Ui Neills. I will endeavour to show that the Vennicni were the forerunners of the Feni who were in turn the Cenel Conaill of Donegal. In doing so I hope to confirm the work of Brian Lacey who has suggested that the Northern Ui Neill were a fabrication and that the Cenel Conaill and Cenel Eoghan were always resident in the area from pre-history as recent DNA findings may confirm. I invite comment to help me improve this article and increase my understanding of the etymology and DNA behind it.

Introduction

The people of Donegal gave us our earliest medieval records of Ireland and Britain in the form of the Iona Chronicle which concentrated its material on the tribes of the Cenel Conaill, Cenel Eoghan, the Dal Riata and Picts of Scotland. Extra material was added anachronistically to the chronicle using sources such as Adamnan's seventh century vita of St. Columcille who lived in the sixth century and king lists such as in Baille Chuin of the seventh century. Adamnan himself was of the Cenel Conaill as was Columcille. 

The chronicle found it's way to Ulster and other places by the mid eighth century where it was continued and became various annals such as the Annals of Ulster, Clonmacnoise, Tigernach and Innisfallon, the first of which became an eventual source of the Welsh Annales Cambrai. Donegal in the early medieval period would not have been called this, but had names such as Fochla (the north), probably saint Patrick's woods of Foclut where he became a slave for 7 years. Leth Cuin (Conns half) was another term for the tribes of Fochla, supposed ancestors of the great Niall of the Nine Hostages. Still later, by the ninth century the area was called Ailech after the Cenel Eohgan had taken control and made the Grianan of Ailech their base. The north of course would also have encompassed much of Ulster.

The tribes of Donegal then went onto conquer much of Ulster (Derry and Tyrone) and pushed into Connaught and Meath claiming the over kingship of Ireland at Tara. These tribes became known as the 'northern Ui Neill', a fabrication born of their merging with the real Ui Neill of the South. Charles Thomas Edwards and Brian Lacey have started the process of unraveling this pseudo-history with Lacey suggesting that the 'Ui Neill of the north' were possibly related to the other Cruithin (Pictish) tribes of Ulster:

"However, it is almost a certainty....that most of the so-called northern UiNeill did not come into Donegal from outside at all, at least as recently as the fifth century as is normally suggested. Rather, they probably emerged instead from within the existing native people of that territory. It's also very unlikely, despite the later widespread use of the name UiNeill, that these people had any connection whatever with the eponymous Niall Noigiallach. Instead it now seems clear that at least most of them were later attached to the UiNeill by fictional genealogical links - as it were, re-invented with fresh (false) identities, as part of a newly constructed 'national' ruling elite........could the Cenel Conaill and the Cenel Eoghan,therefore, or either of these groups individually, have belonged to the Cruithin themselves? “

Donegal in the early medieval period would have been a country of woods, forests, mountains and clearings, with most settlements being in the rich soil of the river valleys and coastal lowland areas. The earliest mention of the area comes from Ptolemy, writing in around 150CE who designates this area as belonging to the Vennicni. Loch Foyle was noted as the Vidoua. Next to them along the coast north eastwards were the Robogdi and south-west of the Vennicni were the Nagnate and Erdini or Erpedani.

The early tribes of Ireland mentioned by Ptolemy must have been there a fair while for their names to have been noted by cartographers and travelers of these times. We do not really know where Ptolemy acquired his information but the eastern tribes of Ireland appear to have been Celtic tribes from Gaul and Britain which included the Menapi and Brigantes. The western seaboard tribes appear to be predominantly indigenous as their names and recent DNA studies show. At what point these Gallic and British tribes made their migrations to Eastern Ireland is a debatable question.

When Caesar arrived in Britain in around 54BC there were many Gallic tribes already settled in the coastal regions such as the Belgae and Parisi and Gallic kings were said to have ruled both sides of the Channel. From this we could then push back the arrival of Gallic tribes to Britain and Ireland to 100BC + and possibly 200BC with the spread of La Tene culture into Britain and Ireland. I think all we can say is that there would have been much coming and going between Gaul, Britain, Spain and Ireland during the Iron Age of Northern Europe.

Did the Irish of the eighth century CE have access to Ptolemy's map of Britain and Ireland? There's a good chance they did as some of the names in the Lebhor Gabala Érenn (The Book of the Taking of Ireland) are just too close to the names of Ptolemy's given tribes. If they didn't then the power of their druids to relate stories over hundreds of years must have been incredible.

DNA

I have mentioned the recent DNA studies that have been undertaken in Ireland. Although these studies are still in their infancy we can come to some general conclusions but I would like to add that this area is still fraught with difficulties so I can only give generalities. Scientists are able to identify a particular genetic pattern in the Y chromosome of the Irish - a genetic marker known as haplogroup R1b. This was found not only in a high percentage of Irish men but also in most of the population of Western Europe who have carried this gene for over 3000 years. Over time Haplogroup R1b was diluted by intermixing with other populations and is now found in relatively fewer people throughout Europe. In Ireland 85% of men have this marker and in western Ireland, especially Connaught 98% of the population carry this gene, which is a subgroup of R1b called R1b-M269.

This means the peoples of western Ireland have remained genetically isolated from the intermixing of populations that occurred throughout the rest of Europe. In effect these peoples have been in Ireland since the late bronze age, when they first crossed over from Britain, without any significant dilution. So the ancient tribes of Ireland were of the same stock as the Bronze age peoples of Britain. They were all 'Pretani' in the eyes of Diodorus Siculus who wrote in around 50BC... “those of the Pretani who inhabit the country called Iris”. Caesar also knew of Britain and Ireland as the 'Prettanic Isles'. It was his innovation to call us Britanni. 

In the UK about 70% carry the R1b marker and within this are subgroups that indicate origins for various peoples. R1b-S145 appears to be the DNA of the ancient Britons themselves, the Pretani making up about 25%. R1b-S21 are the Germanics making up another 15%. Hunter Gatherer's - R1b-S116 make up 9%, Picts come in at 5% - R1b-S530 and Irish at around 8% with R1b-M222.
 

The above subgroup R1b-M222 (a subclade of M269, R-P312) is prevalent in Ireland and Britain. This was at first thought to represent the Ui Neills of Ireland and hence all the descendants of Niall of the Nine Hostages. However DNA testing has shown that although it is fairly common among those with some Ui Neill surnames, such as O'Doherty, it is not common amongst most of the Ui Neills themselves with only 20% of men in Donegal having this gene. It is in fact more prevalent in Ulster, Mayo, northern Britain and Scotland (excluding Argyll). This suggests that these peoples had common ancestors thousands of years ago before Niall was even a twinkle in his mothers eye and that the Ui Neills of the North were nothing of the sort! The Ui Neill gene might be R1b-S668 but it's still too early to tell as these may be Cenel Conaill.

 

Feni and Vennicni

Now let us return to the Feni and Vennicni of Donegal. The etymology of Feni is now established since Eric Hamp's study in 1992 entitled Goídil, Féni, Gŵynedd in the Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium, Vol. 12. Koch agreed with his findings in his paper Celts, Britons, and Gaels—Names, Peoples, and Identities (2000) and Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia of 2006. Hamp proposed that Feni reflects the absorption of *d before *n in early Celtic which allows the construction of Feni as *wēniῑ: *ueid(h)-n-ioi (wednioi). He came to the conclusion that the name Gwynedd was related as the earlier forms were Gwinet and Venedotia from *Ueneda. Gwynedd meaning a 'collectivity of trees/forest'. He also linked the Welsh 'Goidel' (*ueid(h)eloi) as a related term meaning 'the feni who lived in the forests'. Also the Fiana (*ueidh-n-a) a 'group belonging to the woods and forests'. Feni then means 'the tribe that inhabit the woods and forests', this becoming the 'hunters of the woods and forests' and hence those hunters, skilled with spear and bow became the warrior class of the Feni and Fiana, the old Irish word 'feinnid' 'hunter, warrior' summing it up nicely.

Both Hamp and Koch ignore some other tribes apart from Gwynedd that carry the same root. The Veneti of Armorica and Venedi and Feni of the Baltic regions mentioned by Tacitus. The first two of these appear to be directly linked, with the last, the Feni of the northern Baltic doubtful. Also ignored are the Vennicni of Donegal and Venicones of Fife. Ptolemy's version 'Ouennicni' – Vennicni reflects a perfectly natural early spelling of the name in the orthography of the time which continued for hundreds of years. Our task is to tie in the Vennicni with the Feni, why? Because the Feni are directly linked with the Cenel Conaill and if Lacey is correct this people have lived in the region for thousands of years.

The Feni or Fir Feni – were, according to Irish texts of the eighth century onwards, quite distinct from those of the Ulaid (Ulster -the Cruithne/Picts) and those who were Laighin (Leinster – Britons and Gallic tribes):

“Batur tri primcinela in Eri.: Feini ocus Ulaidh ocus Laighin (Gaileoin)” -the three principle peoples of Ireland – the Feni, Ulaid and Laighin.

In this sense Feni may here represent all of the Irish tribes apart from those of Ulster and Leinster, ie the tribes of Connaught, Donegal, Meath and possibly Munster. Indeed in some cases Feni did later come to mean 'the men of Ireland'. However other writings do link the Connachta with the Feni and in two quatrains on the battle of Ballyshannon between the Ui Neill and the Leinstermen, 'the men of Leth Cuinn' mustered by Aed, king of Ailech are referred to as 'Fir Feni'. 'Leth Cuinn'- 'Conns half', was another name for the tribes of Cenel Conail and Donegal. Koch put's it like this :

"In this formulation it seems that Feni means the peoples, whose rulers were reckoned in the genealogies as Sil Cuin (descendants of the legendary Conn Cetchathach). The rulers of Connaught and the pre-eminent Ui Neill dynasties were thus included."

This attempt to separate the peoples of Ireland may contain a kernel of truth.

To tie in the Vennicni, who in the second century CE were living in exactly the same place that the Feni Cenel Conaill were in sixth century we need some evidence. That evidence comes in the form of the name of the river where the Cenel Conail lived, the river Finn. The river Finn empties into the Foyle on its way to the sea and it's valleys were home to the Cenel Conaill. It's seventh century form reported by Adamnan in his Vita of Saint Columcille was 'Fenda' which betrays it's earlier form 'Veneda' which is the same root as Feni/Gwyned (Oueneda) as described above, essentially 'the river of the forest'. So we now know that the initial 'Venni' of Ptolemy's Vennicni represents *wēniῑ. The termination 'ni' appears to derive from the collective ending '-inion', later as 'ni/ne'. The 'c/g' becoming silent. With this we can do away with any semantic relationship with the Pictish 'Venicones' of Scotland although the first part may be another form of Feni or it may represent, or was represented as  'cenn' or 'pen' – 'head' as these Picts were later remembered in Arthurian myth as 'Dog Heads; 'cones' being interpreted as 'cun' - dog. Interestingly Irish myth also has the Irish Arthur - Mac Erca fight 'dog heads' as well.

We need not posit that any of these Veneti tribes were related (except perhaps on an ancient DNA level), merely that they used a common language that spanned the aboriginal areas of Britain, Ireland and Europe. Those of Gwynedd though do appear to have been Irish interlopers. The Ordovices had been the tribe of that area in Roman times and Welsh myth relates that Cunedda and his sons came from the north to remove the Irish (Feni) of Gwynedd.

Loch Foyle and the river Foyle named by Ptolemy as 'Vidoua' provides the final piece of evidence. Hamp stated at the end of his work that it was 'gratifying to find a noun *Uidh-u – 'Woods'' which of course is directly 'Vidu'. So Ptolemy's 'Vidoua' (Ouidoua) is the river Finn and may be evidence of Hamp's noun. Vidoua then appears to represent the Q Celtic? 'vidh' with a termination 'oua' possibly meaning 'river' via Celtic 'abona' (abhainn, abhann, aibhneacha /aunʲ, aun̪ˠ, ˈavʲnʲəxə/ "river"). So the River was originally called the Vidoua at its mouth, inland the Veneda, then it gave its name to the people living alongside it (the Feni), then the river name changed in time to Fenda, Finne, Finny and eventually Finn. The modern rendering of 'Loch Febhail' appears to be related to Proto-Celtic *WEWLO-, 'lips, mouth', which gives gwefl in Welsh (Pat McKay, A Dictionary of Ulster Place-Names, pp. 99-100).

So we are left with a fascinating proposition - the Vennicni were the Feni – 'the hunter tribe of the forest'. Lacey and the DNA studies are correct, the Cenel Conaill have always lived there. There was no 'Ui Neill' movement north into Donegal except in later times by the Cenel Cairpre briefly. The aggression was always southwards by the Cenel Conaill and the Cenel Eoghan their cousins. The Cenel Eoghan however may have been of the Airthir of the Airghialla and it may be their movement against the Cenel Conaill which is remembered (see below).

The UI' Neill 

So were the Cenel Conaill and Cenel Eoghan Ui Neill? One of the earliest mentions (apart from the annals at 621) of the Ui Neills is in Ambra Coluimb Cille, a poem possibly of the early seventh century which describes some of Columcille's ancestors. In this he is described as a "purebred descendant of Conall" which must indicate Columncilles fathers side and if Niall was involved he would surely have linked to him instead. The Conall here is Conall Gulban, supposed son of Niall.

Columcille is also described as a 'son of Conns offspring' presumably relating to Conn Cetcathach an ancestor of Niall.  If as suggested, Conall Gulban was a fabricated addition to Niall's ancestors, the descendent of Niall must have been on Columcille's mothers side. His mother was Eithne who is said to be a descendent of the Cenel Cairpre and this may be where the Niall ancestor lies as Cairpre was a son of Niall. Lacey has pointed out that some of these references in Ambra to Niall were actually missing in the 17th century manuscript and that it was later glosses that filled in the missing parts, making this document suspect for proof of connections to Niall in the early seventh century. Lacey (2004):

"However, Fergus Kelly pointed out that 'the only complete version [of the poem] is found at pp. 107-114 of G50, a 17th century manuscript in the National Library of Ireland'. Kelly advocated a seventh century 'date of composition' but adds that the glosses, on which some of the significant reconstructions of the missing sections depend, 'are in Middle Irish'. Crucially in the manuscript, all of line 9d is missing except for the word 'Neill'. The phrase, 'molfas colum ua neil, comes from the later glosses..."

Also in the seventh century was Tirechans Collectanea. He is most interested in the southern Ui Neills as indicated by Catherine Swift (1991)

" Unlike the branches of the Ui Neill so far discussed, however, the Cenel Conaill of Donegal appear to stand outside Tirechan's immediate concerns.They are neither blessed, as in the case of Conall Cremthainne, nor acknowledged as supreme ruler, as in the case of Loiguire, nor condemned, as in the cases of Coirpre and Fiachu's descendants."

For Tirechan writing in the mid seventh century, the four sons of Niall were "Conallum filium Neill, Coirpriticus filius Neill, Loiguire filius Neill and Fechach filii Neill". (Conall, Coirpre, Loagaire and Fiacha), There is no mention of Conal Gulban or Eoghan. Lacey has suggested that Conal Gulban was a later fabricated genealogical link to Niall. The Conall above of course is Conall Cremthainne, who in Terechan's eyes was the only ruler of a regnum (kingdom) in that time other than Benignus.

In the same work Tirechan however does mention the Cenel Conaill of Donegal. He mentions two kings (reges) of Donegal called Fergus and Fothad who granted the site of Raith Chungi in Mag Sereth to St Assicus of Ail Find. These two in later genealogy appear to have been conflated into the one figure of Fergus Cennfota son of Conal Gulban. Unfortunately Tirechan does not link any of these "filiorum Conill" as decendents of Niall. It's as though the 'sons of Conill' are a separate group to the 'sons of Niall'.

In Muirchu's seventh century life of Saint Patrick the Ui Neills are also mentioned, with Niall being described as "the one from whom was descended the royal stock of almost the whole Island" with Loagaire again being paramount and described as 'emperor of the barbarians'.

The next person to mention the Cenel Conaill is of course Adamnan, writing slightly later in around the late seventh century. Adamnan himself, as well as Columcille were of the Cenel Conaill and so if he was linked in any way with the Ui Neill we would expect him to mention it. He puts words into Columcille's mouth that states he is a descendent of Niall where he mentions Abbot Comgall (founder and first abbot of Bangor in the Ards of Ulster), - "Nellis Nepotes et Cruthini populi" - " a descendent of Niall and the people of the Cruithni" in relation to Columcilles ancestors and Comgall's who were going to war with each other. As we have seen, Conall Gulban was most likely a fabricated addition to Niall's ancestors, so the descendent of Niall must have been on his mothers side as mentioned above.

The inescapable truth is as Lacey suggests, the sons of Conall, who had always lived in Donegal since ancient times were later linked to Niall with the Cenel Eoghan to legitimise their anachronistic claims to the kingship of Tara. The reason for engineering this legitimacy was that the southern Ui Neill dynasties had ruled Tara in the fifth and sixth centuries with interlopers probably from the Ulster and British tribes (Coroticus being an example). That meant making Conall Gulban, another son of Niall.

Lawrence Maney is also unraveling this pseudo-history of the early Ui Neills and sums up the early legends at the end of his work  - Rethinking the Political Narrative of medieval Ireland  - The Hagiographer as Witness (1995), - like this:

"Indeed, the generic 'Ui Neill' which we have adopted as the basis for our narrative of the sixth, seventh, and eighth-centuries did not exist as we have come to envision them at that early stage in their development, no matter how clamorous the cry of the historical sources they have left for us, sources often as fabulous as the most far fetched miracle story to be found in the Hiberno-Latin hagiography of the same period."

You may have noticed that I have ignored the Cenel Eoghan in most of this debate; the reason being that they were not at all linked with Niall until they came to prominence in the second half of the eighth century having defeated the Cenel Conaill at which point they made Eoghan a son of Niall.

Were the Cenel Conaill Cruithne? That's a difficult one to answer. The Cruithne, according to Lacey had inhabited some areas of Donegal north of the river Finn in ancient times but the DNA and the evidence above suggests that the Cenel Conaill were an indigenous people. That's not to say that some mixing with the Cruithne populations did not eventually occur which would be normal in dynastic development.

More likely is that the Cenel Eoghan were of the Airthir of Ulster (or merged with them) who appear to have been descendents of Romano Britons from fourth century Wales. Their genealogies are very similar with a Muiredach, mac Eoghan, mac Niallain (mac Fiecc) being easily transposed to Niall by making Eoghan a son of Niall when the Southern Ui Neill merged with tribes of the north. Mac Erca then, the Irish Arthur of the early sixth century, may have been of the 'Airthir', a name conveniently rendered as 'Arthur' in Brythonic / Welsh. The Airthir were a tribe or sept of the Airghialla. David Dumville comes to a similar conclusion himself in Saint Patrick AD 493-1993 (p.151) stating :

" ..Before the end of the seventh century we can see one of them, the Airthir, explicitly associated with the Ui Neill*: Armagh and Navan lay in the territory of the Airthir, and it is significant that we can see the church of Armagh adjusting it's stance towards the Ui Neill kings of Ulster in the second half of seventh century"

* Dumville quotes Muirchu : " bellum...inter nepotes Neill et Orientales ex una parte " We can see here the Airthir are called 'Easterners'. Dumville suggests the Arghialla had always been Ulster tribes and the story of the Three Collas should be treated with great suspicion, but modern DNA finding may indicate that the Arghialla did indeed come from the east, namely Britain at some early stage, possibly fourth century and integrate northwards conquering Ulster. I think they may have been three columns of Christian (hence Colla Chri) Romano British soldiers from the Roman garrisons in Wales who fled the Christian persecutions of the early fourth century. Hiring themselves out to kings in Ireland. By the sixth century, Dumville would be correct, they would in effect be Ultonians after interbreeding with the local populations. The late post Ptolemy arrival of the Airghialla may also be indicated by the fact that their name is not of the old order as indicated by Eoin MacNiell who comments "The name seems to be of comparatively late formation, and cannot be classed with the old order of plural people-names..." The fourth century arrival of the Arghialla may also be supported by the fact that Latin loan words for the first time enter the Irish language as noted by E.A Thompson in Gildas and The History of Britain (1979): 

"A study of the Latin loan-words in Irish has suggested that they fall into two groups. The second of these groups began to be borrowed about the middle of the fifth century, so that the first group dates at latest from the middle of the fourth century.."

What about Niall himself, did he exist? Probably yes, but on  a much smaller scale than the later myth indicates. His nine hostages were probably those of the Airghialla as that was the exact number of hostages they were said to have to provide. This could mean that the 'Niallain' mentioned above could have represented Niall as the demander of the hostages. In effect this ancestor of the Airthir could have been Niall but not genetically or tribally linked in any way, just adopted!

The name Niall - Nelli, Neill.

What of his name? Meaning 'cloud' from Goidelic 'nel' or 'champion' from Goidelic 'nual' as usually said? Unlikely. It appears to be related to a more indo-European meaning which would be natural as the DNA indicates a degree of isolation so we should expect a degree of ancient indo-European to survive. In Sanskrit 'nili / nila' means 'dark blue' and is pronounced 'nella' much the same as the name of descendents of Niall were known (Nellan). In support of this is an inscription on a standing stone in county Wicklow reading 'Maqi Nili', translated loosely to "Of the son of Neill/Niall". He was the 'blue man'  - a warrior, decorated in blue woad, just like the ancient Britons and Picts. There may be some circumstantial evdience for this from the Lebhor Bretnach in a poem called Duan Eureannach regarding a mythical Nel:

"Nel was carried southwards to Egypt,
Hero of dark blue weapons,

The daughter of Forann was given
Unto him afterwards."

Niall was killed, according to tradition, on the shores of the English Channel in around 455 during the campaigns of the Roman general (and future emperor) Avitus to bring peace to the area.

References

Cenél Conaill and the Donegal Kingdoms, AD 500-800, Brian Lacey Four Courts Press 2006

Celtic Culture: An Historical Encyclopedia, John Koch, ABC-CLIO Ltd (15 Mar 2006)

Tribes and Tribalism in Early Ireland, Francis John Byrne, Ériu, Vol. 22 (1971), pp. 128-166

The Féni, David O'Brien, Ériu, Vol. 11 (1932), pp. 182-183

Goídil, Féni, Gŵynedd, Eric P. Hamp, Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium, Vol. 12 (1992), pp. 43-50

 

Celtic Ireland, R. A. S. Macaliste, The Irish Monthly, Vol. 47, No. 549 (Mar., 1919), pp. 134-141 

Early Irish History and Mythology, T. F. O'Rahilly, Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1946.

 

The Pretanic Background in Britain and Ireland, Eoin MacNeil, The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Seventh Series, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Jun. 30, 1933), pp. 1-28 Published by: Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland.

Excavations at Knowth, Co. Meath, 1962-1965,G. Eogan and F. J. Byrne, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section C: Archaeology, Celtic Studies, History, Linguistics, Literature, Vol. 66 (1967/1968), pp. 299-400.

 The "Amrae Coluimb Cille" and the Uí Néill, Brian Lacey, The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Vol. 134 (2004), pp. 169-172

  

Attacotti, Déisi and Magnus Maximus: The Case for Irish Federates in Late Roman Britain, Philip Rance, Britannia, Vol. 32 (2001), pp. 243-270

The Irish Settlements in South-West Wales: A Topographical Approach, Melville Richards,The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Vol. 90, No. 2 (1960), pp. 133-162

Ptolemy's Map of Ireland,  Goddard H., The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Fifth Series, Vol. 4, No. 2(Jun., 1894), pp. 115-128, Published by: Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland.

Rethinking the Political Narrative of medieval Ireland  - The Hagiographer as Witness,  Laurence Maney,  Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium, Vol. 15 (1995), pp. 89-105.

TIRECHAN'S MOTIVES IN COMPILING THE COLLECTANEA: AN ALTERNATIVE
INTERPRETATION,  CATHERINE SWIFT,  Departments of Medieval and Early Irish History,
University College, Dublin 1992.

The Earliest Irish Annals: Their First Contemporary Entries, and the Earliest Centres of
Recording, A. P. SmythSource: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol. 72 (1972), pp. 1-48.

 Temoria: Caput Scotorum?, Edel Bhreathnac, Ériu, Vol. 47, (1996), pp. 67-88

Published by: Royal Irish Academy.

Saint Patrick, Coroticus and Irish Kings.

Saint Patrick, Coroticus and Irish Kings

“..a man who has no respect for God nor for His priests whom He chose..”

This is an updated version of this essay.

Coroticus was a rich land owning late fifth century tyrant in Ireland and possibly Britain who came into conflict with the apostle of Ireland St.Patrick when some Picts and Scots under the authority of Coroticus captured, enslaved, sold and killed newly baptised Christians in the 470’s - 480’s AD. Patrick first wrote a letter asking for the return of some of the captured women which was refused and then wrote a second letter proclaiming the injustice of these actions and as good as excommunicated Coroticus whom he considered a Christian and a Briton[1]. Only the second letter still survives in five manuscripts but none of them bear a title.[2] This second letter is now called the Epistola ad Coroticum and appears to be an open letter to the people and court of Coroticus and possibly to a wider audience in Ireland and Britain.[3] Before looking at Coroticus in more detail it would be useful to relate a short summary of Patrick’s life to the point where Coroticus became involve using his Confessio and Epistle to Coroticus.

         Patrick, the son of a Christian Deacon called Calpurnius, had been carried off as a slave as a boy of sixteen by Irish raiders from his father’s villa, which was in a village called Bannavum Taburniae ,probably in south western Britain,[4] perhaps at Bantham, Devon[5]. He was taken to northern Ireland, but escaped (or was allowed to escape)[6] in the seventh year when twenty two and returned to Britain and his parents[7]. Patrick doesn't tell us much about his time of slavery in Ireland, only that he tended sheep every day and fortified himself with his renewed belief in the Lord, saying prayers daily and suffering the cold and hardships willingly. That he knew prayers would suggest that Patrick, as a youth, via his father, had been taught the Christian faith and listened to various sermons in doing so but he had not taken his studies seriously. For this lack of faith he blamed his abduction.

Bantham, Devon

      In escaping he travelled two hundred miles to a port as foretold in his dream and escaped by ship with some pagan Irish sailors and made land in Britain after three days, probably around Exmoor; then travelled for twenty-eight days meeting other people after ten days.(Conf.22) This would be the only place in western Britain at this time which could conceivably have been three days travel from a port in northern Ireland and that would allow travel for ten days without encountering another soul. Exmoor would have been much larger then probably rolling into Dartmoor. Either way, Patrick would not have been too far away from his home if it was in Bantham.

      Patrick then, after returning to his parents, trained in his ministry[8] becoming first a deacon before returning to Ireland sometime after Palladius, the first Bishop of the Irish, appointed by Pope Celestine in 431[9]. Palladius, who was also called Patrick[10] in much later ninth century pseudo history, had been merged with the St Patrick by the time of Patrick’s hagiography by the seventh century monks Tirechan and Muirchu who wrote differing Lives of the saint. It is generally now agreed however that Patrick actually arrived for his mission to Ireland in the late 450’s (possibly 456) allowing time for his training as a Priest.

Within 30 years of becoming a Deacon Patrick was made a Bishop. Unfortunately we do not know exactly when this was, but it is generally assumed it was after he had preached in Ireland for some time. His appointment then may have been in the late 460's to early 470's when Patrick must have been in his mid fifties to early sixties [11]. 
Shortly before becoming a deacon, in his anxiety at accepting this appointment, he had confessed a sin that occurred in his boyhood to a close friend. This friend (who had helped appoint Patrick as Bishop) after thirty years, had used it against Patrick when he was already a Bishop, as a pretext for charges against him .[12] He was apparently exonerated. These charges came from what appears to be a British or Irish Church hierarchy who had no problems bringing the charges in what must have been the early 470's.

From these scraps of information we can place Patrick’s birth in the most tumultuous time in British history, the early fifth century at about 413-415[13]. This was a time when barbarian hoards ransacked Western Europe and sacked Rome itself. Britain was devastated by Saxon raids and in concert with Armorica, rebelled and threw out her Roman magistrates and took the government of the provinces into her own hands[14]. Peace and Roman authority in Gaul was restored in 417[15] but the position in Britain is not so clear. Gildas, the sixth century writer of British history may suggest that the Romans did return to restore peace in Britain at around the same time.[16] Patrick’s capture and slavery then would have occurred in 429-431 when he was sixteen; escaping or being released in 436-437 when he was twenty two and finally returning to Britain possibly having spent a short time in Gaul first.[17]

Patrick began his training then in the late 430’s and then into the 440’s may have taken vows of monasticism.[18] Germanus is said to have come to  Britain for a second time in around 435-436 to stave off Pelagianism.[51] Following his visit, by 441 the Scots and Picts started ravaging northern Britain and the Gallic chronicle records that Britain is under sway of the 'Saxons'. According to Gildas, following the defeat of these peoples by around 455, there was a time of luxury, richness and plenty for Britain, which however also brought corruption and licentiousness (455-495)[19], then an invitation to the Saxons in around 472.
      Dumville et al suggest that in the 450’s Saxon troubles may have amplified and an ecclesiastical break with the authorities in Gaul and Rome may have caused the Church in Britain to take responsibility for Irish ecclesiastical matters prompting the mission of Patrick to Ireland.[20] Patrick however says nothing about this and in fact only infers that he went via his own volition to spread the word of God and due to the calling of a dream in which a messenger from Ireland called Victoric(n)us, bearing letters, requested his presence. Patrick probably means St.Victorinus, whose work he seems to know, probably through St. Jerome's (obit 420). This would make sense as Victorinus' commentary on the Apocalpyse espoused that in connection with the Second Advent and the end of the world, he looked for wars, famines, pestilences and persecution of the church. The crowned rider of the four horsemen seated upon the white horse, going forth "conquering, and to conquer," is interpreted as prophetic of Christ's church going forth on its victorious mission, the triumph of Christianity over paganism. Just the sort of mission Patrick was about to undertake during an apoclayptic time for Britain and Europe. Patrick also knows of St Augustines definitions of grace, predestination and perseverance (c.429), suggesting that this chronology is correct in placing his return to Britain after Pelagianism had been stamped out; by Germanus In Britain and Palladius in Ireland.

The fact that Patrick does not mention the Saxons probably means he left before they were called by the British Council mentioned by Gildas and before the Saxons revolted. Examining the traditions spoken of by Gildas and ignoring the pseudo-historical assumptions of Bede, we could place the acquiring of Saxon mercenaries after 464, a retrospective date for the Saxon adventus given in the Irish Annals[21] and following a plague mentioned by Gildas that was evident in Gaul in 463/4[22] having been mentioned by Gregory of Tours. After this the Superbus Tyrannus ( later known as Vortigern) with his councellors requested a foedus with the Saxons for protection in the early 470's. Penny MacGeorge in Late Roman Warlords (pg 101, footnote 400) also mentions this Gildas reference in relation to Gregory's text.  
     The debatable archaeology of the time shows there were only small pockets of Germanic settlements in Britain, probably the result of retired Romano Germanic soldiers of the late empire[23]and some settled after raiding. So this would fit in well with Patrick leaving for Ireland before the Adventus and being ignorant of events in mainland Britain after his arrival in Ireland. By the time he wrote his works in the 480’s to ealry 490's he was still not referring to Saxons, suggesting they had not as yet rebelled.

  Instead of Saxons, Patrick mentions the pagan Franks who were paid off in Solidi for the return of Christian captives. The mention of Solidi is another confirmation of this chronology as it wasn't until after the 420's that golden solidi were used to pay off barbarians and probably not until the time of the Hun's in the 450's did it become common. The Franks had become a nuisance in eastern Gaul in the 430’s under Chlodio, and Aetius held them back somewhat in 431. But from this time until the 440’s they expanded south as far as the Somme. It may be during this expansion when captives may have been taken and Patrick had been in Gaul and then back in Britain that he learned of this practice. However following the demise of Aetius and then Aegidius in 464, the Franks had become by the 460’s a force to be reckoned with in western Gaul under Childeric I (whose grave contained a hundred solidi) and his son Chlodovechus – Clovis – who was himself to become a Christian shortly after Patrick died. In the vita of St Genevieve written in the mid sixth century, Childeric is said to have held captives in Paris and sought to leave Paris with them before Genevieve could intercede. She was able to catch up with him though and negotiate their release.[26] The fall of Paris to the Franks of Childeric is commonly dated to 464/65, although a ten year siege of the city is also noted in the vita but is absent from contemporary sources unless this occurred when Franks allied with Attila entered western Gaul in 450. See also my article on Childeric suggesting a later date for the occupation of Paris by Childeric and for a fuller chronology of Childeric and Clovis.

     Childeric, who was probably Merovech’s brother, not son, seemed to be allied with the Romans and it was probably this prince that Aetius supported in around 448-450 when the Frankish succession arose due to the death of the Frankish king Chlodio. One son chose to ally with the Hun of Attila travelling to Pannonia to do so, the younger went to Rome to petition Aetius who welcomed him warmly and sent him back a friend and foederatus[27]. In any event, Patrick would have learned of the ransoming of Christian captives from the Franks in the 440’s and indeed crowned Solidi of this period (440-450) have been found in Belgium and eastern France supporting this suggestion,[28] although it can’t be ruled out that visitors to Ireland told him of such occurrences at any time from the 460’s to the 490’s.

Patrick then, would have become a Deacon sometime after his twentyfifth birthday, an age decreed in the 16th Council of Carthage in 419, (Canon16). Ludwig Bieler has shown (pg II.93) that Patrick had studied the Canons of the Council of 418 (as he quotes from Canon 5, [but Augustine uses same phrase in 412] so it might follow that he would have have studied those of 419 as well), so lets say around 445 at age 32. He would have needed to study the Canons as that was also an order of the Council for prospective Bishops (419, Canon 18 [Gk. Canon xix.]). 419-Canon 23 states that "bishops shall not go beyond seas without consulting the bishop of the primatial see of his own province: so that from him they may be able to receive a formed or commendatory letter". As Patrick appears to have left of his own volition without permission which would probably not have been granted, we can be fairly certain that he was not a Bishop before leaving for Ireland. He vindicated his actions by claiming in Augustinian terms that it was by the grace of God that he returned to Ireland.
      After becoming a Priest by c.447, he then by 456, at around the age of forty one had his calling to return to the place of his previous captivity. This calling took the form of a dream in which a person named Victoricus gave him a letter from the people of Ireland requesting his presence. His parents and elders were against his returning to Ireland for good reason as the Picts and Scots being well known in Britain of the time for their raiding and settlement. Patrick though resisted these calls to stay, even though he delayed because of them, claiming God as his guide and impetus. So he returned to Ireland and spent his time generally in regions bordering the western Sea, ie Ulster, Mayo, Donegal and other parts of northern Ireland, converting the sons of Irish chieftains and the general population[29]. He mentions nothing about ministering to existing British Christian communities or individuals although this must have occurred later as his mission progressed. He may have been captured twice during these troubled times, once for a few days and once for only two months[30]. 
     How Patrick managed when he got to Ireland is a long debated problem. He appears to have bribed his way around the territories he visited by paying off the Brehons and Fili, i.e., Judges, claiming that during his work he had paid out the price of fifteen men to these Judges. This would probably have been the equivalent of a free mans honour price. It's debatable whether this was equivalent to the honour price of a free man in Britain or of one in Ireland. In any event it was a large amount of treasure, grain, cattle or bondmaids that he would have to have paid as there was certainly no coinage to use. An Irish  free man was worth about 7 Cumals which was 21 cows, equivalent to 21 ounces of silver (595 grams). So Patrick's payments to the Brehons amounted to around 315 milk cows or 315 ounces of silver (Thompson suggested the equivalent of 300 gold solidi including the bribes to the kings). This was before he even got to the kings! These figures may have been lower in the fifth century though so lets assume 250 milk cows and similar amount of silver ounces. Over a period of 20-30 years that looks a tad better, perhaps 8-10 cows per year or 5-6 Solidi; still a relatively large amount though and payments to the kings and entourage would have increased this significantly as Thompson states.
     By paying off the Judges he was able to approach the nobility of the land to further bribe them with presents and to convert their children and the general population. Once converted some of these sons of kings became his followers on the road. Patrick himself, being a foreigner to these Túatha would have had no honour price of his own, being a cu-glas, an outsider (as he frequently called himself). He would though under Irish law, once under the protection of the Brehon or Fili, be entitled to shelter and food with those nobility he visited. Patrick claims that he himself refused presents and payments for his work; the reason being that as a cu-glas with no honour price of his own he had to be very careful to make sure he was not accused of breaking any laws of the lands he passed through, such as theft or fraud. How did he then finance the ongoing mission? Some scholars have suggested that it was financed from Britain but with no coinage available at this time that is unlikely. Gildas mentions silver and gold in the sixth century when describing the finances of the tryant Maglocunus, so it's possible some of Patrick's wealth, when he sold his birthright, was converted to such and used . Another solution may be that the ongoing mission was financed by those who followed him. The sons of kings would have come with their property, cattle and bondmaids. Perhaps as in any cult, it was the followers wealth combined that made the ongoing mission financially viable and perhaps it was these followers that accepted presents, not Patrick himself. Although Patrick himself says he paid these kings son's as they accompanied them. Did the Church authorities perhaps also provide some support for Patricks efforts?

The time frame in which Patrick, the letter, and Coroticus are placed is towards the end of Patrick’s life, so around 475 to 485. Patrick was to die in around 493 after upwards of nearly forty years in his mission to Ireland. This date seems secure by Patrick's use of the word 'exagellia', in his Confession, shortly before he died, which was only used in a small number of texts from the  late fifth to the early eight century. An example being a usuage by Ennodius (obit 521) in his Vita Epiphanus . See Bieler on this.  If as suggested his birth was in around 413-415 then he would have been eighty at the time of his death. At such an advanced age, in his late sixties or early seventies when dealing with Coroticus, it is clear why Patrick was not able to confront him himself and hence sent letters instead with trusted clerics, one of whom he had taught since childhood. Of other associates or romantic links we have no knowledge except a very beautiful noble woman that he mentions in passing in his Confession.

   Patrick’s status as the apostle of the Irish is based mainly on much later seventh and eighth century hagiography. Some evidence of this may be seen in an early document which is silent concerning him. It is the letter of Columbanus to Pope Boniface IV in around 613 CE. Columbanus writes that Ireland's Christianity "was first handed to us by you, the successors of the holy apostles", appearing to refer to Palladius alone and ignoring Patrick[31]. His main impetus appears to have been in northern Ireland, the southern half having already experienced Christianity under previous missionaries and Palladius[32]. Patrick's rise to fame in the seventh century coincided with political manoeuvrings in Ireland of the time when competing tribes foisted their own Saints to positions of glorification; Brigit and Columcille being the impetus for Patrick’s elevation by the powerful Ui’Neills of the North. In the fifth and sixth centuries Irish Christianity was still a separate entity in law from secular society and had no powers to impose its will. By the seventh and eighth centuries this had changed and a merging of ecclesiastical law with that of secular had attained and this empowered religious leaders, leading to conflicts and outright war between them. Their respective saints were used in these battles for religious dominance with Patrick emerging victorius[33].

Attempts have been made to associate Coroticus with the Strathclyde King Ceretic, an ancestor in the Harleian Genealogies of Rhun Ab Arthal of the ninth century. Although the genealogies may be corrupt or inaccurate they do place Ceretic in nearly the correct time frame in a life spanning the last third of the fifth century to the first third of the sixth century. Professor David Dumville of the University of Cambridge worked out from the genealogies a tentative obit for Ceretic of approximately 522. Of course the possibility remains that Ceretic himself is purely based on the legend of Coroticus and a late attachment with Dumbarton. Finally though, as Coroticus was a Briton it’s quite possible he did enter Ireland via the Strathclyde region, suggesting he may have been a ruler there as well, having pacified the Picts and Scots and taken some to Ireland with him (Ireland however already had Pictish peoples called Cruithne[34] settled there and of course Scots).

As well as Dumville’s work on St Patrick, great strides were made into the problem of St.Patrick and Coroticus by James Carney in the 1950’s, by Charles Thomas in the 1990’s in Christianity in Roman Britain who suggested a plausible chronology and by E. A. Thompson in his works St.Patrick and Coroticus[35] and Who Was Saint Patrick. In these Thompson pointed out that although Coroticus may have been a Briton, he must have been ruling in Ireland at the time, as Patrick was able to as good as excommunicate[36] him which he could only do if Coroticus was within Patrick’s Episcopal jurisdiction. This revelation of course produced many questions and Thompson came to the conclusion that Coroticus was a British exile or renegade freedman amongst a larger British population in Ireland. This would not be beyond the bounds of possibility. Gildas, in the sixth century describes the exodus from Britain with the advent of the Anglo Saxon expansion in the mid fifth century. In the late ninth century the Breton writer Wrdisten in describing the words of Gildas tell us that the exodus was to Armorica, Ireland and north eastern Gaul (Belgium)[37]. Patrick’s mission therefore, may have originally been to this fledgling British population in Ireland from which he then expanded into the wider Irish or Hibernian population as he calls them. As well as the Irish common Hibernians he also distinguished the Scots who were probably the northern Irish nobility[38] and the Picts some of whom were under the command of Coroticus.

In the late seventh century a life of St.Patrick was written by the monk Muirchu entitled ‘Vita Sancta Patricii’ which survives in the Book of Armagh. In the eighth century headings of this book by an unknown scribe, Coroticus is called ‘Coirthech Rex Aloo’[39]. Aloo is a genitive form of Al or Ail, ‘rock’ which has prompted some to translate Rex Aloo as ‘King of Alt Clut’, the `Rock of the Clyde’ an old name of Dumbarton[40] in Strathclyde, Scotland. With this attachment[41] Coroticus was instantly made a king of Strathclyde who commanded Britons, Picts and Scots. He was now able to raid Ireland and carry off captives for sale abroad. Thompson’s work of course changed this view that Coroticus had to be based in Dumbarton and Dumville agreed that Coroticus actually ruled to some degree in Ireland.

In his letter to Coroticus Patrick attempts a form of excommunication without stating as much. Michael E Jones in `The End of Roman Britain’[42] puts it like this in the way Patrick thinks about Coroticus:

“ ..Coroticus will suffer accordingly, with punishment in the future life and exile (through excommunication) in the present one...”

What happened after the letter to Coroticus is generally unknown. Muirchu in his life of St. Patrick explains a supernatural tale of Patrick asking God to remove Coroticus and then during a meeting of his royal court a bard sang a song suggesting that Coroticus should leave his royal seat, which was miraculously echoed by the assembled nobility. At this Coroticus turned into a fox before their very eyes and scurried away.[43] All we can say is that Coroticus probably returned to Britain at some time after the letter, either exiled, as hinted by Jones above, or according to his own free will. Most likely though is that he ended his life in battle or old age in Ireland.

The idea that ‘Aloo’ refers to Alt Clud, ‘the fortress of the Clyde’ appears to be without any firm basis in fact[44]. Bede calls Dumbarton AlCluithe and the Annals of Ulster for 780 ‘Ail Cluaithe’; in 870 ‘Ailech Cluathe’and finally Adomnan in the late seventh century calls it ‘Petra Cloithe’[45]. Therefore the name clearly always carries the Clyde river assignment. Add to this the archaeology which shows no fortress until the seventh century and Alt Clud appears to recede in consideration even further[46]. Coroticus, as Thompson and Dumville have shown was actually based, at this time in the late fifth century, in Ireland and hence it is to Ireland we must look for the name of this Kingdom.

‘Ail’ or its Britonnic form ‘Al’ and genitive old Irish form Alo means `the Rock’ and its genitive early Scots Gaelic form was Aloo and the later Irish genitive was Ailech. Therefore the kingdom in Ireland that Coroticus belonged to was the one later known as Ailech, in Tir Conell, later Donegal, northern Ireland, home to the northern UI’Neill dynasties and the descendants of Eoghan son of Niall of the Nine Hostages. Ailech was their fortress, one of the most famous in Ireland with a history stretching back to the Iron Age and with evidence of an early medieval sixth century stone structure[47]. All we need do now therefore is ascertain who was ruling the kingdom of Ailech or its earlier name Fochla in the late 470’s to early 480’s when Patrick wrote his letter. Fochla or Foclut, the north, as Patrick put it (focluti  foclu, fochla) would have encompassed quite a large area of what is now Donegal and most of Ulster.

This is not an easy task as pseudo-history has masked the actual events we seek to discover. We know that the sons of Eoghan had established themselves in Fochla by around this time and part of the area even took his name as modern day Inishowen. It was Eoghan and his brothers Coirpre/Cairpre and Conall and their descendants who appeared to rules these areas as Cenél Cairpre, Cenél Conaill and Cenél Eoghan. Cenél Conaill are said to have ruled the Ailech region incorporating the Grianan of Ailech before Cenel Eoghan took the area in the eight century. In the fifth century though it is probably impossible to say who really operated with any authority in the area with several petty kings probably co-existing. In the Annals only two kings are said to have been paramount at this time Coirpre and Lugaid and it appears to be Coirpre who enters the life of Patrick in his vita as a hostile opponent. 

 Later seventh century hagiography by Terechan of St Patrick’s life locates Coirpre (here called Coirpriticus[48]) as residing in Meath (Mide) with Conall (Conallus) his brother and there was by that time a sept of Cairpre settled there. As the hagiography presented a Patrick who lived much earlier in time, these ‘sons of Niall’ were presented as ruling in areas they were later said to have emerged from, in this way the pseudo-history of the Ui’Neills was being woven. It’s telling that it was Coirpriticus who was opposing Patrick in the vita and here Patrick is said to call him “an enemy of God” a term Patrick himself actually used of Coroticus. Coirpre, in the hagiography even goes to the lengths of trying to slay Patrick and flogs some of his followers by a river, exactly as Coroticus’ men had done in reality to newly baptised Christians. A tentative proposal then could be that Coroticus was the man later known as Coirpriticus and in Irish Coirpre. Here are the actual words of Terechan concerning Coirpre and his brothers :

“On Sunday, he (Patrick) came to Taltena, during the royal games, to Coirpriticus, the son of Neill, who wished to slay him, and flogged his servants in the river Sele, which act of Coirpriticus was told Patrick, who called him an enemy of God, and said to him "Thy seed shall serve the seed of thy brothers, and there shall not be a king of thy seed forever, and there shall never be great fish hereafter in the river Sele."

Soon after he came to the house of Conallus, the son of Neill, which stood in the place where at this day, is the church of the great Patrick; and he received him with joy, and was baptized, and Patrick confirmed his throne forever, and said to him, "The seed of thy brothers shall serve thy seed forever, but you and your sons, and your son's sons, ought to deal mercifully unto my sons and successors, who faithfully believe for ever;" and he ordained that the length of the church of the God of Patrick should be sixty feet, and Patrick said, "If the church be lessened, thy reign shall not be long, nor firmly established””[49]

         Brian Lacey, in his work Cenél Conaill and the Donegal Kingdoms 500-800 (2006) suggests that the sons of Eoghan were always based in the north and the expansion had in fact been southwards and an amalgamation was made with the Ui’Neill’s of the South creating the North and South Ui’Neill pseudo-history. The startling suggestion that Coirpre may have been Coroticus and hence a Briton should not be so startling, as Lacey has started to unravel the process and suggests the northern ‘Ui’Neill’s’ were in fact Cruithne – Pretani – Britons! Coirpre was included in the earliest Irish King list in the Baile Chuind Chetchathaig before Lugaide, possibly another Briton, who was then followed by Mac Erce, the famous ‘Arthur’ of the Irish. Subsequent politics of the late seventh century onwards meant Coirpre was written out of later king lists which favoured the Cenel Conaill and Cenel Eoghan. By the time the hagiography had been written the identity of Coroticus with Coirpre may have been forgotten and so Coroticus entered the hagiography as Corictic based on Patricks own words.  

          This idea that the Irish may have adopted Britons into their genealogies and into their pantheon of Kings should not be surprising for Dumville has pointed out that the sixth century Briton St. Uinniau (anglicised as Ninian) who became resident in Ireland was adopted, not only into one, but two widely separate Irish genealogies by the beginning of the eighth century.[50] He also suggests the same for St Cairnech whose existence, although questionable, also shows two or more separate genealogies, sometimes agreeing in places. In the equivalent Welsh St Carranog we find in two cases that his father is called ‘Corun’ which is the Welsh version of the Gaelic ‘Sarran’ – `tonsured’. Now St Cairnech’s father in the tales of Mac Erca is called ‘Sarran’. This does suggest that Cairnech and Carranog were actually one and the same character whether real or imaginary. However the idea that Coirpre was Coroticus is un-provable and so we may be best just suggesting that Coroticus reigned in his tyranny to some degree at around the same time as Coirpre and that Ailech was a common enough name for places in Ireland.

---

[1] An Age Of Tyrants, Britain And The Britons, C. A. Snyder 1998, Sutton Publishing Ltd. P.77, Also by Dumville et al Pg.109 and most other commentators.

[2] Saint Patrick 493-1993 David N Dumville et al, 1993,  Boydell Press. Pg. 107

[3] Ibid. Dumville et al p.109

[4] K. Dark, Saint Patrick 493-1993, Pgs 19-24. Suggesting the West Country around Dorset.

[5] My suggestions for two possible locations of his home village would be Bantham, which sits at the mouth of the river Aven/Avon in Devon or Benaven which sits on a horn of coastal land near Nevez in Brittany again at the mouth of a river Avon. Bantham (which could be an Anglicisation of Bannavum) in Devon shows much evidence of post Roman occupation well into the sixth century and so looks the better possibility. It also sits on a horn of land which is what the Bann part of the name signifies, as does Benaven. With Taburniae, ‘of Taburnus’, we may here have another clue linking the place with Bantham as the root of Taburnus may lie in the IE root *steb(h)- 'post, pillar, stump, to support' which may link it to the nearby arched stone formation on the coast near Thurelstone.

[6] The period of servitude for a slave in ancient Ireland was usually seven years, so it may be that in the seventh year he was allowed to escape. See A New History of Ireland Vol 1. Edited by Daibhi O Croinin. Oxford 2005, for details about this period of slavery.

[7] The Confessio, Patricks  own work.

[8] Confessio. Patrick himself says “thanks be to God, because after so many years the Lord bestowed on them according to their cry” meaning it was many years before he returned to Ireland.

[9] “Palladius, having been ordained by Pope Celestine, is sent as first bishop to the Irish believing in Christ”. Chronicle of Prosper of Aquitaine.

[10] Ibid. Dumville pg.39 quoting Tirechan.

[11] This may appear quite late to some but evidence may be in Patricks own Epistola Ad Coroticum where he confirms that he must put on record that he is a Bishop, as though it is not yet well known. E.A Thomson also came to the same conclusion in Who Was Saint Patrick, Boydell Press, 1985, Chapter 5, suggesting that he became a Bishop in his sixties. Although Thompson bizarrely assumes Patrick was a Bishop before arriving in Ireland, which Patrick's writings do not state.

[12] Confessio Para.27. “They brought up against me after thirty years an occurrence I had confessed before becoming a deacon. On account of the anxiety in my sorrowful mind, I laid before my close friend what I had perpetrated on a day—nay, rather in one hour—in my boyhood because I was not yet proof against sin.” and  para32.

[13] Charles Thomas in Christianity in Roman Britain, University of California Press 1992 – in chapter  13, pg.319 suggests 415AD which agrees with my own chronology so I have followed his in this work.

[14] Gallic Chronicle of 452 and Zosimus.

[15] The Cambridge Ancient History. Volume 14, Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, AD 425–600, Cambridge University Press, 2001.

[16] Gildas, De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae  The History, Paras 17 and 18. Gildas’ knowledge though of events before 450 is sketchy and confused at best and so should be treated with caution.

[17] Ibid Charles Thomas pg. 321. Patrick’s 72 hour boat trip would seem to suggest a destination further than Britain. Although differing translations of this part suggested by Dumville and others may suggest Patrick just meant 'a few years later' as an indication of a jump forward in time, rather than saying he took a few years to see his parents again.

[18] Dumville and Charles Edwards, Saint Patrick 493-1993 p.18.

[19] Gildas “the island was deluged with a most extraordinary plenty of all things, greater than was before known, and with it grew up every kind of luxury and licentiousness”

[20] Dumville ; p.18

[21] Annals of Ulster U464.2  The Angles came to England.

[22] Gregory of Tours “At that time a great plague destroyed the people”. Chronicle source, entry written just before the mention of the death of Aegidius in 464. Gildas 22: “a pestilential disease morally affected the foolish people, which, without the sword, cut off so large a number of persons, that the living were not able to bury them. Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant, were so blinded, that, as a protection to their country, they sealed its doom by inviting in among them like wolves into the sheep-fold), the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful both to God and men, to repel the invasions of 

the northern nations”

[23] Michael E Jones. The End of Roman Britain, Cornell University Press 1998, pg.25

[24] Gildas 19. ”No sooner were they gone, than the Picts and Scots, like worms which in the heat of the midday come forth from their holes, hastily land again from their canoes, in which they had been carried beyond the Cichican* valley, differing one from another in manners, but inspired with the same avidity for blood, and all more eager to shroud their villainous faces in bushy hair than to cover with decent clothing those parts of their body which required it.  Moreover, having heard of thedeparture of our friends, and their resolution never to return, they seized with greater boldness than before on all the country 

towards the extreme north as far as the wall.”

[25] Gildas 21.”And then it was, for the first time, that they overthrew their enemies, who had for so many years been living in their country..”

[26] http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/golden216.htm

[27] Priscus, apud Excerpta de Legationibus, p. 40, ed. Paris.

[28] See Fifth Century Gaul A Crisis of Identity? edited by John Drinkwater, Hugh Elton 2002, Part VI. A Crisis of Identity: Roman, local and barbarian coinages in fifth-century Gaul, C. E. King.

[29] James Carney, Studies in Irish Literature and History (Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1955) iii, Questia, 7 Mar. 2009

[30] Confessio 21. “And a second time, after many years, I was taken captive. On the first night I accordingly remained with my captors, but I heard a divine prophecy, saying to me: ‘You shall be with them for two months.’ So it happened”

[31] Ibid Dumville et al, Pg.10 by T.M.Charles Edwards.

[32] Kathleen Hughes, The Church in Irish Society 400-800. Pg 308. A New History of Ireland, 2005.

[33] A New History of Ireland. Edited by Daibhi O Croinin. Oxford 2005.

[34] Cruithne is just the Goidelic form of Pretani just as Coithrige is a Goidelic form of Patrick.

[35] The Journal of Theological Studies 1980 XXXI(1):12-27; doi:10.1093/jts/XXXI.1.12 © 1980 by Oxford University Press.

[36] He never actually uses the word so some doubt remains in this respect.

[37] Le Cartulaire de Landevenec, Arthur De La Borderie Arbre, d’Or, Genève, 2004. p.15. Wrdisten nomme trois de ces pays : d’abord celui qu’il habite luimême (istam terram), c’est-à-dire la péninsule armoricaine, puis l’Irlande (Scoticam terram) et le nord-est de la Gaule (Belgicam).

[38] Ibid Dumville et al.  " It is an affront to them that we are Irish (Hiberionaci)". Dumville says of this "It is as though 'Scottus' meant specifically 'pagan Irish', whereas 'Hibernus' or 'Hiberniacus' had a more neutral connotation.

[39] In Muirchu’s work he is called ‘Corictic’.

[40] From the Gaelic `Dunn Breatann’ Fort of the Britons.

[41] This idea dates back as far as 1886. See ‘A multidisciplinary chronology for Alt-Glut, Castle Rock, Dumbarton’. Leslie Alcock 1976.

[42] Cornel University Press 1998.

[43] ‘Conversing With Angels and Ancients, The Literary Myths of Medieval Ireland’, Joseph Falaky Nagy, 1997 Cornell University Press.

[44] Ibid Alcock Pg.105  “the earliest of these references is the most contentious”

[45] Ibid Alcock Pgs. 106-107 Petra = Rock.

[46] Ibid Alcock Pg.111.

[47] Medieval Ireland, An Encyclopedia, By Seán Duffy, Ailbhe MacShamhráin, James Moynes. Routledge; 2004, pgs.11-12

[48] A strange version as the earlier fifth and sixth century forms would appear to be ‘Coribiri’, later Corrbri, Ibid McManus.

[49] Book of Armagh (TCD MS 52) http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/celtic/ctexts/patrick-armagh4-tirechan.html

[50] Ibid Dumville et al. Pg.140.
[51]  See Saint Germanus and the British Missions, Anthony A. Barrett, Britannia, Vol. 40 (2009), pp. 197-218 for a discussion and dismissal of the second mission.