When we are celebrating St. Patrick’s Day, are we (just maybe) celebrating two saints who merged together? Or, to pose a perhaps controversial question, was Saint Patrick really the “lone gunman” of the Christianization of Ireland? Or did you have any help? Was he even the first missionary to come to the Irish? Or… are there (at least) two historical Patricks, who we now see as one person? Questions that may well be asked. Although the popular image of the saint might suffer a bit … in a search for historical probabilities and (perhaps) truth.
Saint Patrick – the official story
According to some hagiographers (these are official but highly biased biographers, basically fans of the saint, and with the intention of promoting his cult), folklore and legend, Patrick was the main man. Only. Coming from somewhere in the East with a papal blessing, he just converted the Irish to Christianity, spread the gospel everywhere on the island, and of course banished the snakes while he was there.
He was the undisputed superstar of Irish Christianity, who didn’t even exist before him, and who wouldn’t exist without him. So far popular knowledge. But even Patrick’s own words contradict this …
Saint Patrick: the evidence
We have two works attributed to Saint Patrick, his autobiographical “Confessio” and a letter to a renegade chief, which contain almost none of the above statements.
Taking this as evidence, Patrick was a deeply concerned, yet successful missionary who most likely worked quite locally. He was also not averse to self-gratification: he honestly believed that by bringing the gospel to the “end of the world” (at that time, Ireland), and by converting the last pagans, he would bring the end of time. Second coming imminent, get ready for the kingdom of heaven, milk, honey and hosannas. Despite the geographical problems (even in Patrick’s time there was knowledge about other “ends of the world”, in Asia and Africa) …
if Patrick were remotely as active and important as his hagiographers wanted him, he would have told us. In all humility.
What’s more… there is evidence that a certain Palladium was sent on a papal mission to Ireland before Patrick was sent. And even Patrick’s march papers sent him “to the Christians in Ireland,” so there must have been some before he got to his mission.
Palladium, the great contender
Palladius was, in fact, the first bishop of the Irish Christians, preceding Saint Patrick by a few months. He could have been a deacon of Saint Germain of Auxerre. Ordained a priest around 415, he lived in Rome between 418 and 429. He fondly remembered urging Pope Celestine I to send Bishop Germanus to Britain, to bring the British back to the Catholic fold.
Then, in 431, Palladius himself was sent as “the first bishop of the Irish to believe in Christ.” Note that even here it is assumed that there are already Christians in Ireland. Who only needs encouragement and guidance from Rome. Fictional? We can take it for sure: Saint Ciaran Saighir, the first Bishop of Ossory, died in 402. Thirty years before Palladium and Patrick made their way to Ireland.
Thus, Palladio received his marching orders. And somehow it disappeared from the earth … or so it seems.
Muirchu, author or compiler of the “Book of Armagh,” wrote two centuries later that “God hindered it.” Moreover, “those fierce and cruel men” wanted everything except “to receive their doctrine easily.” Since Muirchu does not explain how those same savages apparently greeted Patrick a year later with (at least moderately) open arms, and not raising their arms… it seems that it was God’s will that Palladium was doomed. Perhaps because they did not cut off his missionary material, as Patrick’s wise follower explained: “He did not want to spend time in a strange land, but returned with the one who sent him.” A shirker in the face of the Lord!
But Muirchu may have had a vested interest in promoting Patrick over Palladius, and is therefore considered a far from reliable source.
Other evidence points to Palladium being really successful. It is associated with some places in the province of Leinster, especially Clonard in County Meath. But there is also a group of places dedicated to Palladius in Scotland. The village of Auchenblae is even believed to be their last resting place: an annual “Paldy Fair” was held here. Remember: the northern part of Britain, inhabited by Picts and Welsh, only became known as Scotland after the Scots left their mark on it. And ‘Scotsman’ was what the Irish were called for a long time.
In “Annals of Ulster,” we also find an intriguing reference: “Old Patrick’s Rest, as some books say.” Wait … old Patrick? Does it mean there is a younger one?
Patrick – What’s in a name?
Actually, there may have been several Patricks, today Patrick is a common name in Ireland, at least. But was it in the 5th century? Maybe not. And what’s more: in Latin it would be “Patricius”, and this can also be an honorary title, something like “The Honorable.” Therefore, any large cheese at that time may have been named “Patrick,” despite being Tom, Dick, or Harry.
Two Patricks would explain a lot
It was TF O’Rahilly who first put forward the “Two Patricks” theory. In keeping with this, much of the information we think we have about St. Patrick today originally referred to Palladium.
The churches associated with Palladium (and some of his followers) cluster around Leinster’s power centers, near the Hill of Tara, for example. But we didn’t find any in Ulster or Connacht. Here Patrick seems to have blossomed.
In later times, Palladium was still remembered in Scotland (at least until the Reformation), while Patrick’s memory eclipsed Palladium in Ireland. And as both may have been referred to as “Patricius” (at least in honorific), their separate traditions merged into one. With Patrick becoming the lone star… and missionary gunslinger.
Finally, can we try it all?
No, unless indisputable documentary evidence appears, which is unlikely, although not impossible. But would it really matter?
