Was Saint Patrick even real?

Fighting leprechaun 20

I was thinking about it and there's no real evidence for his existence , the confession for example was written 100 years after he supposly died , it seems more likely he was invented by someone with to much time on their hands .

Where's the evidence of lrish raiders as well ?

Ipso

Fighting leprechaun 20 wrote: »

I was thinking about it and there's no real evidence for his existence , the confession for example was written 100 years after he supposly died , it seems more likely he was invented by someone with to much time on their hands .

Where's the evidence of lrish raiders as well ?

Well Scotland is named after the word given to raiders by the Romans: Scoti.

The word gael comes from a Welsh word given to raiders.

tac foley

I thought that Scotland was named after the Northern Irish tribe of the same name who migrated to Caledonia [the Romans' name for Scotland], and who, in doing so, displaced the indigenous tribe of Britons known by the Romans as 'Picti' from their habit of covering themselves with tattoos.

As a Welsh speaker, I've not heard of the word 'gael' in Welsh. 'Anrheithwr' means raider, BTW - not a whole lot like 'gael' I would have thought.

tac

Ipso

I don't think the group called themselves Scoti, it was a name given by the Romans. They mainly would have been ftom the North.

Gael comes from a Welsh word like gwyl which means savage or wild man. It was used to describe Irish raiders.

cfuserkildare

Yeh,

The Scoti moved from Ireland to Scotland,

But the Hibernii moved the other way didn't they?

Ipso

I thought Hibernia was the Roman name for the island of Ireland.

I didn't wat to weigh in too much on the original question as I'm not too wel versed, but I thought it was accepted that the modern incarnation of Patrick is an algamation of two real people: a british slave (I also read he may have come from what is now Cumbria) who became a bishop and a French missionary named Palladius. Throw in shamrocks, snakes and guinness and you have a national holiday.

Also wasn't there an Irish missionary named Declan who was spreading christianity before "Patrick's" time?

robp

Ipso wrote: »

I didn't wat to weigh in too much on the original question as I'm not too wel versed, but I thought it was accepted that the modern incarnation of Patrick is an algamation of two real people: a british slave (I also read he may have come from what is now Cumbria) who became a bishop and a French missionary named Palladius. Throw in shamrocks, snakes and guinness and you have a national holiday.

Also wasn't there an Irish missionary named Declan who was spreading christianity before "Patrick's" time?

The standard view is that he exist and I have never heard any historian arguing the contrary. There are various details are probably untrue like the year he was said to come but there is fairly clear core that is reliable. We know this from the Confessio and the Letter to Coroticus, which are considered his genuine writings.

baaba maal

According to Dáibhí Ó Cróinín from UCG there is a recognised issue with "the two Patricks" theory, debated by historians over a long period. It is fascinating stuff to be honest. As an aside, Prospers Chronicle (he lived in Rome and is considered a very reliabe source, apparently) has it that a French bishop Palladius was sent "to the Irish believing in Christ" by 431- predating all accepted dates for Patrick's arrival, so even if there was only one of him, he was at least the second bishop sent to Ireland, and definitely at least the third Christian!

tac foley

Ipso wrote: »

I thought Hibernia was the Roman name for the island of Ireland.

Yes, it was, derived from Ierne/Iverne or similar.

Caledonia was Scotland, Cumbria was Northern 'England' and Cambria was Wales.

Anyhow, we HAVE to assume that Patrick was real, after all, he said he was, didn't he?

tac

tac foley

Whooopeeeee! I did an emoticon!!!!!!!!!!

tac

Wibbs

tac foley wrote: »

Yes, it was, derived from Ierne/Iverne or similar.

Nothing so complex, it translates in Latin into "the land of winter"(Hibernis = Winter and from where we get the word hibernation). The Romans had various imaginings of Ireland. Some commentators considered it like Britain only milder, some thought it so mild and lush cattle would explode from eating the wondrous grass in the place and others thought it a greyer colder place. Presumably the latter gave it the wintery name.

tac foley

o.

Thanks.

I read my version of the name on this forum, posted by a noted Irish historian and scholar.

Guess you can't bleeve ALL you read, eh?

tac, still ignorant but better-informed.

outdoors247

Of course he was real if he wasn't who got rid of the snakes hahaha

Wibbs

Climate, the ice ages and evolutionary pressures. :P

Fighting leprechaun 20

Wibbs wrote: »

Nothing so complex, it translates in Latin into "the land of winter"(Hibernis = Winter and from where we get the word hibernation). The Romans had various imaginings of Ireland. Some commentators considered it like Britain only milder, some thought it so mild and lush cattle would explode from eating the wondrous grass in the place and others thought it a greyer colder place. Presumably the latter gave it the wintery name.

I though hibernia was a mistranslation by the romans from the Greek word Ierne/Iverne meaning land of wealth , the Romans mistranslated this to land of winter

Wibbs

Could be FL, though Ierne comes from the locals name for the place Eiru AFAIR?

Fighting leprechaun 20

Wibbs wrote: »

Could be FL, though Ierne comes from the locals name for the place Eiru AFAIR?

I suspect that lerne is obviously related to Eiru , so maybe the original name was Eiru and the Greeks called it lerne , and the Romans looking at the Greek manuscript mistranslated it to hibernia from lerne ? So many mistranslation , what a **** up lol

Allthough the word Eire is a name for a Greek goddess of peace (not related maybe? ), so maybe the lrish word was fairly similar , what ever it was , and the Greeks were like , oh that must be this goddess and must mean this from the translation that we got off some unreable second hand source or they just made it up , but maybe that it's self was also a mistranslation , idk it seems like it's all hard to figure out and most info is a lot of speculation.

Tbh most of what the Greeks and Romans say is made up or a mistranslation from a second hand source or propaganda , a lot of it is pure fantasy .