John Lewis examines the life of St. Patrick

The questions concerning St. Patrick’s origins, actions and identity are many, difficult and perhaps unsolvable. Scholars agree that there are three sources from which to gain information about his life:1) his own written works, the Confession and the Letter to Coroticus; 2) the early Latin biographies by Muirchu and Tirechan; and 3) external references such as those found in the various Irish Annals (Hood 1). Concerning facts, however, only the Confession and Letter are admissible; even by the time of Muirchu and Tirechan, barely two centuries after his death, Patrick’s life had been conflated with legend, myth and the purposes of ecclesiastical politics. As soon as we proceed past his own works, to inference instead of documented evidence, controversy arises regarding almost every aspect of his life (Thomas 308). This paper will consider the relationship between Patrick’s works, his earliest biographies, and the difficulty of reconstructing the historical Patrick from them. It will frame the debate around who Patrick was in terms of the chronology of his life, the topology of his mission, and his place in the history of the Irish Church.

            The two authentic works by Patrick, the Confession and the Letter to Coroticus, survive originally in the Book of Armagh, a ninth century compilation of texts concerning the See of Armagh; they also exist, however, in six other manuscripts dating from the tenth to the twelfth centuries (Hood 17). A group of three sayings attributed to Patrick, the Dicta Patricii, appears in the Book of Armagh and a number of other manuscripts, but they are of dubious authenticity (17). Although we can obtain a rough outline of Patrick’s life from these works, the details are anything but clear; in fact, Thomas compares him to Gildas when he says “Patrick is sparing in the extreme with any reference to absolute dates and identifiable place names” (Thomas 308).  
The following skeletal narrative represents all we know for certain about Patrick’s life, as gleaned from the Confession: Patrick’s father Calpornius was a deacon and his grandfather, Potitus, a presbyter in the village of Bannavem Taberniae, in Britain (Confession 1).[1] At the age of sixteen he was captured by Irish pirates; during his captivity he became a devoted Christian (2). In Ireland he worked as a shepherd (16), until he heard a voice speaking to him at night; he then fled the island on a ship. He had been in Ireland six years at that point (17). After three days the ship made landfall, and he and his shipmates “traveled for twenty-eight days through uninhabited country”; as famine approached, however, they discovered a herd of pigs and some honey (19). The place of his landfall is a loudly contested point; many critics locate the “uninhabited country” in Gaul, while others identify it as Britain. In any case, a few years later he visited his parents (in Britain), but in a vision was called back to Ireland (23). During his ministry in Ireland he suffered many trials (37), but he claims to have baptized “many thousands of people” (50). Patrick ends his work with the phrase “this is my confession before I die” (60), suggesting he was an old man when he wrote it.

            Both Charles Thomas and A.B.E. Hood interpret the Confession in this way: It is the work of an old man, and predates the Letter (Thomas 345). From certain passages within it (i.e., “They found a charge against me after thirty years, a word which I said in confession before I was a deacon,” Confession 27) it becomes clear that he is concerned with refuting various accusations about his earlier ecclesiastical career (Thomas 330). For Hood the Confession is also a “justification of his work in Ireland” (Hood 17). Who his accusers were, though, or what the accusations themselves consisted of, is unclear. There is, however, another aspect of the Confession that reveals something about Patrick’s character. Patrick is excessively humble, saying that he is “unskilled in everything” (Confession 49), and frequently citing his poor Latin, his simplicity and his rusticity. For Hanson the Confession is an “acknowledgment to God of the goodness which he has shown to Patrick” throughout his life (Hanson 13), and from it we get a very personal, spiritual portrait of a devoted Christian missionary.

            The Letter to Coroticus, on the other hand, is an “indignant protest” against the capture and murder of Irish Christians by the British king Coroticus and his army (Hood 17). It offers us scant biographical information about Patrick, but it does hint at his motives and his relationship to Britain. Coroticus was a Christian, and in the Letter Patrick excommunicates him (Letter 5). He also indicates the contempt with which he was held in Britain, possibly by the more learned British ecclesiastics in particular (10), which seems evident since Coroticus “dared to carry out this massacre” in the first place (Hanson 67). Occasionally scholars have attempted to date Patrick by Coroticus, but Coroticus has proven to be an even more elusive and mysterious character than Patrick.

            Clearly, the lack of concrete dates or names is a problem when it comes to fitting the chronology of the Confession and Letter into its historical context. Therefore the dating of Patrick involves much guesswork. The chronicler Prosper of Aquitaine records a certain Palladius as being sent as bishop to Ireland in 431; tradition has Patrick sent a year afterwards, replacing Palladius upon his death (Thomas 315). Most scholars accept that Patrick’s arrival in Ireland occurred c. 432, but others have suggested dates of arrival and death of 380 and 430; others have suggested 460 and 490; yet others believe the persons of Palladius and Patrick have become confused in tradition (Hanson 20). J.B. Bury, citing various Irish Annals, accepted 461 as Patrick’s death date, but Hanson suggests this was merely synchronized by later Annalists with Pope Leo I’s death (Thomas 315). The uncertainty surrounding Patrick’s dates of arrival and death has led some to believe there were two Patricks. The theory of two Patricks was championed by Carney and O’Rahilly in 1961, but was put to rest, in Hood’s opinion, in 1962 by D.A. Binchy (Thomas 316; Hood 15). Various methods have been used to incorporate Patrick into a definite space in history. Hanson, for instance, attempts to reconstruct a “framework of dates contextually and inferentially” using contemporary sources, but Thomas attempts to produce a “relative chronology” that can be attached to some absolute date at some point (Thomas 314-315).
For Binchy, there is insufficient proof for any of the dates posited for Patrick – Patrick mentions no dates himself, of course (Binchy 7). Hanson, however, is willing to infer from Patrick’s eschatological tone that his mission revolved around the sack of Rome in 410 (Hanson 23). An earlier date in the first half of the fifth century, Hanson argues, also makes sense if Patrick’s mission was British, since the British Church would have more money to fund a mission to Ireland before the Saxons began attacking in the latter half of the fifth century (24). Hanson interprets Patrick’s frequent lament over his lack of education (see Confession 9-10, 13) as referring to the rhetor stage of Roman education. Therefore Patrick must have been brought up while the Roman system was still active in Britain, and so he could not have been born before 390 (Hanson 21).Thomas, on the other hand, argues that 492 is the date of Patrick’s death, and thus he must have been born in the fifth century (Thomas 318). The inconsistency in dating, coupled with the embellishment of later Lives, has also led to egregious miscalculations of Patrick’s age; in fact, a seventh century hermit claimed to have “discovered” that Patrick taught for exactly 61 years, leading to a lifespan of 120 years. This tradition was soon incorporated into the Irish Annals (Hood 15).

Another major obstacle in the interpretation of Patrick’s works is the disorganized and obscure quality of his Latin (whether written or dictated) (Hood 18). His Latin is notoriously poor; he was, after all, taken captive when he was sixteen, interrupting his education and leaving him “semi-literate” (6). Patrick is fully conscious of his lack of learning and poor language, which evidently led to some of the contempt with which his contemporaries in the British Church regarded him (Godfrey 24). Nevertheless, to infer conclusions from Patrick’s Latin beyond what is plainly said is a problematic endeavour. Christine Mohrmann regards Patrick’s Latin, outside of the direct Biblical quotations, to be fundamentally colloquial in form (Thomas 325). Patrick would have picked up such colloquial Latin in either Britain or Gaul (Hood 18). For Mohrmann, his Latin corresponds to that spoken in Northern Gaul at the time, and from this linguistic evidence she concludes that Patrick must have visited North-west Gaul, but not the traditional site of Lerins (Thomas 325). By a similar linguistic argument Binchy has suggested that Patrick could not have trained at Auxerre, since this would have provided him with a more sophisticated Latin (326). Binchy has stated that more linguistic research should be done to discern if Patrick’s colloquialism arose from Gaul or Britain (Binchy 171). Thus the linguistic problem of Patrick’s works has led us to a discussion of his whereabouts and travels, which has proven just as contentious an issue as his dating.

            Bannavem Taberniae, for instance – Patrick’s hometown – appears nowhere in maps of Roman Britain; indeed, nothing even remotely similar appears (Hopkin 24). Some scholars have posited an error in the manuscript form of the Confession, and suggested Bannaventa Berniae as an emendation; at least it is admissible as a place name, though no place bearing it has been found in the record (Hanson 19). Some scholars have taken the “uninhabited country” Patrick mentions in Confession 19 to refer to a portion of North-west Gaul plundered by barbarians (Godfrey 21). However, Patrick never explicitly mentions visiting Gaul, although he does mention in Letter 14 the customs of “the Roman Gauls who are Christians,” which seems to suggest he had visited them, or was at least aware of them (Hanson 69). The question of Patrick’s travels is rendered unanswerable by his own works, and it is even further complicated – along with all other issues – by his earliest biographers.

The two earliest extant biographies of Patrick, by Muirchu and Tirechan, were written c. 665-80, about two centuries after Patrick’s death (Hopkin 37). They are, in Hanson’s opinion, the only biographies that could make any claim to historical authenticity, and both are contained in the Book of Armagh (Hanson 15). Binchy, however, considers them both “propagandists” for the Ui Neill dynasty that was attempting to secure control of the Irish Church at Armagh in the seventh century (Binchy 12). Muirchu, in his Life, spends a great deal of time on two specific themes: Patrick’s education in Gaul and the foundation of his see at Armagh (Hanson 16).Both are notably missing from the Confession and the Letter. Muirchu makes Patrick into a Moses-like figure, a patriarch and national apostle for the Irish (Hopkin 40). Muirchu’s life is undoubtedly political in its purpose; he asserts he wrote “under the direction” of bishop Aed of Sletty, who was the principal advocate of a northern see at Armagh and of Roman conformity in Easter practices (Hood 13). As such, the climax of his tale is a rather fantastical battle at the Hill of Tara , where “at his voice the wrath of God came down on the ungodly people and many of them perished” (Life 20). The conversion of king Loegaire here stands for the conversion of all Ireland, and Patrick, in his next journey, goes on to demand that his Church be built atop the hill at Armagh (Hood 13). Hood is particularly gentle to Muirchu, calling his Life a “plain factual narrative” and dismissing the legendary wizard duels and miracles (13).

Thomas, on the other hand, considers the only historically valid portions of Muirchu’s Life to be those derived directly from the Confession (Thomas 309). Both Muirchu’s and Tirechan’s account contain typically hagiographical, miraculous material (Hanson 16). Although Muirchu’s tale is highly “embroidered,” research by Irish genealogists and archaeologists have shown that it is likely Patrick did succeed in building his church at Armagh c. 444; however, many other reports indicate he built his centre at Downpatrick (Hood 10). Muirchu’s Life is not history, and in many ways directly contradicts Patrick’s character as outlined in his own works; he replaces the humble Patrick with a “wonder-working druid” (Hopkin 39). He also becomes more like a surly epic Irish hero, and Hopkin notes he becomes strangely given to cursing (46). Interestingly, Muirchu’s work represents the first appearance of a “cult of St. Patrick,” and coincides with the first use of Patrick’s story being “rewritten in the interests of propaganda” (38-39).

            Tirechan’s work is even more politically charged than Muirchu’s. In the seventh century Armagh was “claiming jurisdiction over all other churches in Ireland, in opposition to the powerful monastic connection which appealed to the authority of Columba” (Hanson 16). The Sayings with which Tirechan begins his work indicate that Patrick studied in Gaul, and perhaps Italy; the statement in question is “I had the fear of God as my guide for my journey through Gaul and Italy, and also on the islands of the Tyrrhenian sea” (Sayings 1). However, these sayings are acknowledged as forgeries. They do not “recall either Patrick’s style or vocabulary,” and Hanson places them in the seventh century or later (Hanson 17). The fabulous structure of Tirechan’s account clearly serves an agenda; Patrick arrives in Ireland with a horde of clergy, sets up his official see at Armagh, and then tours Ireland founding the other churches (16). The framework is mythical and repetitive, and meant to indicate that all should cede to the supremacy of Armagh (Hood 14). Tirechan’s story is more the stuff of myth than Muirchu’s, and is usually valued only insofar as he mimics Muirchu – and Muirchu, as I have noted, is often only valued insofar as he mimics Patrick himself.

            Other brief references to Patrick occur in the Irish Annals, but recent investigation has shown that none of the Annals could have been begun before 740 (Hanson 18). They all agree on 432 as the date of Patrick’s arrival in Ireland, but disagree as to his death, (17). Notes in the Annals of Ulster and Annals of Innisfallen are likely retrospective, pro-Patrick, pro-Armagh glosses (Thomas 334). Besides these the most substantial early Medieval Life of St. Patrick is the Tripartite Life, written in Irish between 895-901 (Hopkin 53). It is designed as a sermon to be read during the feast of St. Patrick’s Day, which had been institutionalized by the ninth century (53). The Tripartite Life features the Patrick legend almost in the form in which it appears to us today; it was very popular and continued the process of “recasting Patrick in the mould of an Irish epic hero” (57-58). Here the story of Patrick has been further elaborated, and he has been linked with continental Christianity – his mother has been upgraded to a kinswoman of St. Martin of Tours (59). It is full of folklore and “pious imagination,” taking Patrick to Rome, to Auxerre to train under St. Germanus, and to Tours as a monk under Martin (Hanson 16). In Hanson’s words the Tripartite Life is an instance of “hagiographical embroidery and fictitious enhancement” (16). By this point the historical Patrick has been submerged in a tradition that began in the seventh century, linking Patrick to the continent; the text itself offers nothing of value to the historian of the actual fifth century Patrick.

            The essential problem with the later biographies of Patrick is the significant gap between the fifth century, when Patrick lived, and the seventh century, when his first biographies were written (17). This is more than enough space for “legend and wonder” to seep in and distort things (18). The image of Patrick within his historical context was further obscured by the process of reading back seventh century ecclesiastical problems onto him, and the desire to connect him with glorious contemporaries such as Germanus and Martin (18). In the emerging controversy between the Irish and Roman churches, adherents of conformity with Rome “revived and magnified” the image of Patrick, stressing his ties to Rome and the Continent and his supremacy in Ireland (Hood 1). The Book of Armagh itself is problematic; the early Lives bound together with Patrick’s works served a very political purpose, to act as the “sacred foundation of the claims of the see” (14). In Hood’s opinion they have “since pervaded, corrupted and obscured the straightforward reality” of Patrick’s life and works, which are already frustratingly uncertain at best (14).

            Thus Patrick’s role in the formation of the Irish Church was severely magnified. An eighth century work, the Catalogue of the Irish Saints, says that during the first period of the Irish Church (c.430-544), it was episcopal in form, with 150 bishops (Godfrey 44). This sounds like an exaggeration, but it is possible that Patrick consecrated bishops on a tribal basis (44). 150 bishops, however, is nothing when compared to Tirechan’s wild claim that Patrick consecrated 450; several scholars argue that Patrick could not have consecrated any, since it takes three bishops to consecrate another, and he was alone in Ireland (Hood 14). The point is, however, that Ireland did not incorporate a monastic system while Patrick was around, suggesting he was not trained in this tradition, in either Britain or Gaul. Hanson, for one, does not think that Patrick’s education was continental, believing that his mission was from the British Church, not the Roman; his argument relies on the fact (as stated in the Confession) that Patrick left for Ireland only after first returning home to Britain (Hanson 27, 30). Another item insisted upon by the Medieval Lives is that Patrick both founded Irish Christianity and completely converted the island; but this claim is “baseless” (Binchy 165). In South and Central Ireland, the Irish Church was not founded until a generation later, and long remained a minority faith (Hood 1). He also did not found it – clearly Christians were in Ireland before if Pope Celestine sent Palladius to them (Godfrey 22). It is therefore apparent that the question of Patrick’s role in the Irish Church, like the questions regarding his origins and geography, is one shrouded in misconception and hotly debated.
So the question of “Who was St. Patrick?” is barely answerable; his narrative is the brief one sketched earlier in this paper, and his person was one of rusticity, humility and spiritual strength. This is not the image of Patrick we are left with today. As Thomas notes, the “Patrick of current mythology has been put together… mainly from an oblique inheritance from a long series of Lives” (Thomas 309). The first of these were those of Muirchu, Tirechan and the Tripartite Life, which contrived the many symbols and traditions associated with the Patrick legend. Since his death Patrick has been made into a secular hero, a continental saint, and post-eighteenth century, a symbol of the Irish nationalist movement (Hopkin 9). He has become larger than life; and yet, underneath this, lies a very clear and honest voice, one who speaks to us in his own words from a period to which we are almost entirely deaf. It is my belief that the early Lives of Patrick are important for charting the development of the Patrick cult and of Christianity in Ireland, but they reveal little about the historical Patrick or his true character. We might not know who he was, where he was, or even when he was – not as precisely as we would like – but through the Confession and the Letter to Coroticus, we get a brief and tantalizing glimpse at what all these answers could be. And that, in essence, is the heart of the Patrician puzzle – a puzzle that, barring a major archaeological breakthrough, might never be solved.

Works Cited
Binchy, D.A. Patrick and His Biographers Ancient and Modern. Studia Hibernica 2
(1962). 1-173.
Godfrey, John. The Church in Anglo-Saxon England. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1962.
Hanson, R.P.C. The Life and Writings of the Historical Saint Patrick. New York: The
Seabury Press, 1983.
Hood, A.B.E. St.Patrick: His Writings and Muirchu’s Life. Chichester: Phillimore and
Co., 1978.
Hopkin, Alannah. The Living Legend of St. Patrick. London: Grafton Books, 1989.
Muirchu. Life. Edited and translated by A.B.E. Hood. In St.Patrick: His Writings and
Muirchu’s Life. Chichester: Phillimore and Co., 1978. 81-98.
Patrick. Confession. Edited and translated by R.P.C. Hanson. In The Life and Writings of
the Historical Saint Patrick. New York: The Seabury Press, 1983. 76-126.
Patrick. Letter to Coroticus. Edited and translated by R.P.C. Hanson. In The Life and
Writings of the Historical Saint Patrick. New York: The Seabury Press, 1983. 58-
75.
Patrick (attributed to). Sayings. Edited and translated by A.B.E. Hood. In St.Patrick: His
Writings and Muirchu’s Life. Chichester: Phillimore and Co., 1978. 60.
Thomas, Charles. Christianity in Roman Britain to AD 500. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1981.