Thursday, January 31, 2013

St Patrick was from some kind of Britain ...

St Patrick Series:
Φιλολογικα/Philologica : St Patrick was from some Kind of Britain
somewhere else : What if Tradition is Contaminated?
Creation vs Evolution : Linking to Others
Φιλολογικα/Philologica : I have already written on St Patrick after the Ancient Narrations


... And traditions mostly does not make it the Armoric one, but rather the one later settled by English and Scoti (i e Irish) warlords who changed the formerly British tongue of most subjects, except in Wales. I e the Island known as Great Britain. So, I will not recommend a thesis saying St Patrick was from Armoric Britain, now known as Bretagne. Does that mean I discourage each and every book that has this thesis in it? Not so!

I have not yet read the book by Rev. Philip Lynch C. Sp. S. which was completed by his nephew James Lynch who paid me a beer or two in Paris some while ago - same beer as I toasted to Tolkien in Irish Cider this 3 of January (and the city where is patron saint she who is also saint of that day). The main asset, despite the unfortunate attempt to accomodate Armorican claims to have Bannavem Taburinde or Bannavem Tiburniae (unfortunate unless they found such a place name there, that is), is that it is based in 64 Irish Bishops' Lives of Saint Patrick. Now, for St Genevieve the Bollandists offer only two lives - with an appendix about her head relic that was stolen and reconvered when Vikings raided Paris - and here is a book offering 64 lives or the compendial summary of such. But I will now leave the word to James Lynch for his book review and ordering info:

Book Press Release

A new book “Saint Patrick After The Ancient Narrations” by Rev. Philip Lynch C.S.Sp. has just been published by his nephew James Lynch. The story of our National Saint has been directly transcribed from the ancient narratives with suitable commentary, nonetheless in agreement with the ancient narrators. No less than 64 Bishop-Saints wrote several lives of Saint Patrick. Our National Saint was British, hails from Armoric Britain, present day Northern France, spent 60 years on mission to our Isle where he consecrated 355 bishops and ordained 3000 priests.

Hardly a district in Ireland was not visited and blessed by our National Saint as he travelled by chariot preaching, baptizing, healing, blessing and chastising in some cases. Read about the plots on his life, his promises secured from God for the Irish, his way of converting the Gaels, the many relics he got from Rome and elsewhere, the many writings sayings and relics he left to the future Church in Ireland. Many of his own family accompanied him as bishops, priests, nuns and lay, becoming saints also.

He taught the Trinity, unity with Rome, the importance of prayer and fasting, and was easily understood by the Irish as he had the Gaelic language unlike many of his predecessors. Pope Saint Celestine commissioned Patrick, formerly called Sigerson, in the 4th year of his Pontificate to evangelize the Irish with suitable powers and materials. His life's work was written in his time by Brogan his scribe and faithfully transcribed in the monasteries for posterity, such writings being the basis for this book.

We have not been taught the whole story of Saint Patrick and in this Year of Faith declared by Pope Benedict XVI what better time to get to know our great National Saint. We believe Patrick brought the Faith to Ireland thus are we to be surprised he continues to have an interest in our spiritual welfare.

http://www.Saint-Patrick-History.com

Available from;

James Lynch
Carrickmore
St.Johnston
Co. Donegal
Ireland

087 2899762

Jaslynch1234@gmail.com
or
James1234Lynch@twitter.com

€20 includes p+p.


The problem with Armoric Britain, except for it not yet being called Britain probably in Saint Patrick's day, but Armorica, is also that St Patrick identifies as a former countryman to a British warlord who raided Ireland and made slaves from among the newly baptised Irish. His words are "I count you no longer a countryman of mine, but a compatriot of the devil" and a few more words like that. He was not very fond of slave hunters, for understandable reasons. Now such a crook would have maybe had more anarchic freedom and possibly also better sea voyage for his pirate ships if acting from the Strathclyde area than from Bretagne. But do not let that deter you from buying an otherwise probably excellent book, written by a remaining Traditional Catholic among the non-FSSPX Holy Ghost Fathers and his nephew, and based on the lives of 64 Bishop Saints./HGL

10 comments:

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

Quote about the book: faithfully transcribed from ancient writers, mostly clerics. These eyewitnesses wrote his life history for posterity and each succeeding monk faithfully reproduced these writings, suitably updated, for the use and benefit of the future Church.

So, the main content of the book is a faithful transcription of the 64 Vitas, then it is worth it, even with errors about Armorica.

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

It would be too limiting to confine a history of Saint Patrick to his Letter to Croticus or from his own Confession as there was so much more to the works, life and history of our National Saint.

Ah, Croticus was the Briton he refused to continue consider as a countryman. I do not propose to limit St Patrick's life to that letter, but neither to ignore it or how it fits with a Strathclyde origin of the Saint.

Would we do justice to the late lamented Blessed John Paul II by confining his history to two letters he wrote in his times?

Not quite the same thing, since from John Paul II we have so much more from his own hand. Both from his carreer as Karol Wojtyla and from his carreer as John Paul II. In the Popes' directory of http://documentacatholicaomnia.eu, here: Sanctorum Paparum Conspectus Alphabeticus he has left more written material than any other Pope as far as I can see.

St Patrick has not, or if he has, it has not come to our times.

However, the probably reason why there is this limit in the St Patrick studies is the anti-miraculous bias of historians nowadays. In his own letters, he does not refer to his miracles out of modesty and so they are the only sources, possibly, that leave the miracles out. To the near Atheist bias among Historians, that makes them the two only relaible sources.

somewhere else : History vs Hume
http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.com/2013/01/history-vs-hume.html


Begins a four essay series (links on the message) against this antimiraculous bias.

Good for the two Lynch that they did not fall for it!/HGL

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

Book arrived. Generally excellent reading.

Before the Legends of Saint Patrick, Saint Bridget and a few more, there is a very good part about the Flood, dealing very thoroughly with what its waters, both rising and whirling and receding, as well as icebergs drifting then, may have caused and how it may have affected the so called "fossile evidence".

A side point: the author is not at all Geocentric. He thinks that the centrifugal force of Earth's rotation is responsible for keeping water as high above equator as above poles. Wonder what Sungenis would say of that, now?

I could think of two responses from a Universe rotating around earth, which is what we see daily, which is what Joshua's Long Day and the Ten Lines Receding of Sun in Isaiah 38:8 also seem to testify.

One is Sungenis' response: Stars and Planets and Sun rotating around us daily have exactly same effect of centrifugal force as if earth were rotating within them, daily.

One is: Universe rotating makes the waters go round the equator daily, and therefore draws them from the poles.

One more is: water is heavier at poles since approaching zero Celsius (32 Fahrenheit, I think), and a last one purely physical: water is deeper down at Poles than at Equatorial Shore Lines, but deeper down still at Equatorial Deep Sea, as Mariana Trench.

But of course, water spirits keeping water duly distributed as well as doing tides by watching Sun and Moon will do as well. Whom did Jesus speak to when he told the waves to shut up (when his disciples in the boat were afraid)?

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

I just went from that onto the story of St Patrick.

First apparent reason for making him French: he is in the composite story - for each biography is given once, as a composite of the different biographies - said to have been taken by Niall of the Nine hostages along with 199 other lads and lasses.

King Niall of the nine hostages was asked to come to Scotland to help the Dalriads against the Picts. He came and settled matters and at their request changed the name of that country to Scotia Minor. Our neighbouring island was then known as Alba, Lagria, and Cambria. Then under provocation he went into Lagria and after he had fixed things there he went into Northern France and from there returned to Ireland with 200 hundred noble children among whom was Saint Patrick and his two sisters (Lupita and Darereca). He was about 16 years of age ...

That is what I think about his age too, thus he was no longer a child. But point about him coming from Northern France, first we do not know that Niall of the nine hostages ever went there any more than we know King Arthur went to Byzantium. There is a thing called bragging. But second, if he did, if this is true about Niall, he can have taken St Patrick from Alba / Scotia Minor or from Lagria (=England) quite as well as from Northern France. The story does not say all 200 came from the last place he went to before returning. And third, I think this can be a later biography, from the time when your neighbouring island was divided into Alba, Lloegr and Cymru or Alba, Lagria, Cambria = Scotland, England, Wales. This was not yet the case in St Patrick's day, nor in the very next century either.

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

Second apparent reason for Northern France rather than Alba or Lagria (or for that matter Cambria) being the general later denomination for St Patrick's homeland: (I summarise) The voice from heaven told him he would return home. The seavoyage took 60 days, which is ridiculously long for crossing the Irish Sea.

Answer: it is also ridiculously long for getting from Ireland to Northern France. By modern boats Cork to Le Havre takes about 24 hours. A normal time for getting there back then would have been a week utmost. Either the 60 days are an exaggeration, or if not, the ship drifted away from intended course and then came to destination by another route. Irish Sea > Orkney Islands (were they even inhabited back then - if not they are a good place for the episode in the wilderness) > West Coast of Britain = first too much North, then much longer way south than expected.

10 years is also in itself ridiculously long from Troy to Ithaca, that does not mean Ulysses came from America.

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

Third apparent reason for his home being Northern France: he goes off to Rome and on his way there meets St Germanus of Auxerre.

Well, Auxerre is no doubt between Northern France and Rome, it is also between the greater British Island and Rome.

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

When it comes to Niall, he was ancestor of the O'Neills who might have been into bragging. Here is a quote about him:

There are various versions of how Niall gained his epithet Noígíallach. The saga "The Death of Niall of the Nine Hostages" says that he received five hostages from the five provinces of Ireland (Ulster, Connacht, Leinster, Munster and Meath, and one each from Scotland, the Saxons, the Britons and the Franks.[11] Keating says that he received five from the five provinces of Ireland, and four from Scotland.[3]
Note 11: Tom Peete Cross & Clark Harris Slover (eds.), "The Death of Niall of the Nine Hostages", Ancient Irish Tales, 1936, pp. 514-517
Note 3: Geoffrey Keating , Foras Feasa ar Éirinn 1.48, 1.49, 1.50 , 51 , 52

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

Geoffrey Keating seems to have misunderstood some:

"An Irish fleet, (he says,) went at this time to the place where St. Patrick was, to pillage the country, and, as was the custom with the Irish, they brought a large number of captives with them, together with St. Patrick, then aged sixteen years, and his two sisters, namely Lupida and Darerca; and St. Patrick was brought as a captive to Ireland in the ninth year of the reign of Niall, king of Ireland, who held strenuously the sovereignty of Ireland twenty-seven years,

p.403

and who pillaged Wales and Anglia to the sea that lies between Anglia and France. {Hoc autem tempore quaedam classis Hibernica depredavit patriam in qua morabatur D. Patricius et, consueto Hibernorum more, multi inde captivi ducti sunt, inter quos erant D. Patricius aetatis suae anno decimo sexto et duae eius sorores Lupida et Darerca; et ductus est Patricius in Hiberniam captivus anno nono Néill regis Hiberniae qui potenter 27 annis regnavit ac Britanniam et Angliam usque ad mare quod est inter Angliam et Galliam devastavit.}"

From the above words we may believe that Niall Naoighiallach entered Great Britain, and that he made conquests there.

I am also of opinion that it was while Niall was making conquests in Great Britain that he sent a fleet to pillage the borders of France, to the country which is called Armorica, which is now called Little Britain, and that it was thence Patrick and his two sisters were brought as captives. I am the more convinced of the truth of this from the fact that Patrick's mother was sister to Martin, who was bishop of Tours in France, and because I read in an old book, in which is the Life of Patrick in Irish, that it was from Armorica Patrick and his two sisters were brought into captivity.

It is moreover likely that, since Niall was making conquests in Great Britain at that time, it was from Britain he sent a fleet to the borders of France, where Patrick and those who came with him into captivity resided. And besides I read in the old books of the seanchus that hostages were brought from France to Niall, and amongst these I believe was Patrick.


Niall was not said to have pillaged Northern France, but simply Britain unto the Sea that is between England and France. So he went into the British Channel, but it is not stated, it is just what Keating read into it, that he went to the French side.

Using words like Anglia also show that the manuscript Keating relied on was not from St Patrick's time or soon after.

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

He does not state any source for this except an old book:

I am the more convinced of the truth of this from the fact that Patrick's mother was sister to Martin, who was bishop of Tours in France, and because I read in an old book, in which is the Life of Patrick in Irish, that it was from Armorica Patrick and his two sisters were brought into captivity.

Was it from A.D. 500 or from A.D. 1000? He does not say, nor indicate anything where we are helped to decide that question.

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

But since St Martin came from Pannonia - roughly Hungary and parts of eastern Austria - and came to Gaul, his sister could have come to Britain under Roman rule. It was one empire.