;, :■>■'■"■>,• - 
 
 4;?;^:^- ;'^. •;'■:; 
 
 Return this book on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 University of Illinois Library 
 
 1 
 
 ^ n^::'^ 
 
 , -' 
 
 
 
 ;* 
 
 J(!( '>U I'-r'- 
 
 
 
 0'' ■ :? .* 
 
 ■'# ;• "! 
 
 
 fll'6 2 5 IS 
 
 83 
 
 
 JUL 2 4 ma 
 
 
 
 . ■ 
 
 
 L161— H41 
 
-/ / 
 
 Ss ,^_ 
 
 St GILDAS OF RUTS AND THE IRISH 
 REGAL CHRONOLOGY OF THE SIXTH 
 CENTURY :-^' . ■■ -'^ '■■" ■ :^^ :'-•- • v : WM^m 
 
 a. THE OBIT OF ST. GILDAS l--^.':''^t-:^- 
 
 b. THE FERIAL CHRONOLOGY OF TIGHERNACH COMPARED 
 
 WITH THE CHRONOLOGY OF LATER AUTHORITIES 
 
 c. THE DATES OF THE ECLIPSES CHRONICLED BY 
 
 TIGHERNACH ' : 
 
 d. THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE OF GILDAS 
 
 s 
 
 ■l--'^ . 
 
 .'»." ^^ 
 
 BY 
 
 ALFKED ANSCOMBE 
 
 
 
 
 July 1893 
 
 
 ;:;. ; -; ;,H\-^';':* 
 
 <* 
 
 ■<". "'■ 
 
 
 
 ■ _. _ .-^'f* -' ■ 
 
 
 
 ''. ■_. '. .- 
 
 .'-■-: 
 
 ^■^y\y-e: - 
 
 
 
 
 y;^; 
 
 ':/. :W' - 
 
 
 
 •::-vr---:-,,f„: 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 I 
 

 
 
 PnilTTKD BT 
 
 sporriswooDB and co., kkwstrket sqoark 
 
 LONDON 
 
 1 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 

 I 
 
 
 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF ST. GILD AS 
 
 OF BUYS 
 
 The extant Lives of St. Gildas * are apparently separated and 
 distinguished from each other more sharply than are the Lives of 
 any other British saint, by the varied and unequal treatment to 
 "which the biographical material composing them has been sub- 
 jected. Each biographer, in order to review the field of his 
 labours before marshalling the facts which had been handed down 
 to him, would seem to have chosen a different standpoint ; or, 
 speaking more correctly, perhaps, the circumstances within which 
 each biographer found himself would seem to have necessitated 
 one. The direct effect of this is that chronological continuity is 
 entirely wanting to our knowledge of the life of St. Gildas of 
 Buys, one writer having magnified what another has neglected, 
 and one being fully conversant with and appreciative of the im- 
 portance of certain facts which the other has only partially 
 reahsed or has wholly ignored. The laborious attempts to re- 
 concile the conflicting statements in the lives with each other, 
 and with the shorter notices of the saint which may be gleaned 
 from other legendary sources, have resulted in unexampled confu- 
 sion, which has necessitated an increase in the number of saintly 
 personages bearing the name of Gildas, apparently as often as 
 chronological difficulties required. This result is attributable, in 
 the main, to initial errors in the chronology of the period immedi- 
 ately preceding that in which St. Gildas flourished, and partly to 
 the inequaUty in the treatment of biographical matter which has 
 just been referred to. The chief causes of this inequality of 
 treatment are, without doubt, to be found in the migratory habits 
 and in the long life of the saint. The lifetime of Gitdas is natu- 
 
 ' I. Vita S. Gildae auctore Caradoco Lancarbanensi. Edited from the Bumey 
 MS. 310, collated with the Royal MS. 13 B (both in the British Museum), and 
 compared with MS. C.C.C. Cant. xii. cent., by Rev. Joseph Stevengon, in the 
 edition of the ' Excidium ' of Gildas published by the English Historical Society, 
 1838. II. De Sancto GUda Abbate et Confessore. MS. Cotton : printed by Cap- 
 grave in ' Nova Legenda Sanctorum.' III. Sancti Gildae Sapientis Vita, auctore 
 monacho Buyense anonymo. ' Scripserat. . . , S, Qildae vitam monachus quidam 
 Buytiensis sive e S. Qildae monasterio, quam ex vetustissimis membranis Floria- 
 censibus edidit in Bibliotheca Joannes Boscitts Coelestinua e quo earn hie damus. 
 Ipse ubi et quando vixerat aiictor indicat, i.e. A.o. 1024.' Acta Sanctorum, 29 
 January, sec. iv. par. 30, p. 571, fo. A. 
 
 of 
 
 f 
 
 59272 
 
 r ■ 
 
aa THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF . I 
 
 rally divisible into three periods of successful missionary effort. 
 He evangelised in his youth the northern part of what had been 
 the Eoman province of the Britannias ; ^ in middle life his founda- 
 tion of Ruys served as a model for the monastic establishments • 
 of the Britons in Armorica ; ' and in extreme old age he played 
 an important part in the correction of ill-defined ecclesiastical 
 irregularities (perhaps of doctrine) in certain parts of Ireland * — * 
 not necessarily beyond the limits of the province immediately 
 governed by Ainmire. In addition to these evidences of travel it 
 must be remembered that Gildas was born in Alban, 'that he was 
 educated in Deheubarth,^ that he visited Ireland before the death 
 of St. Bride {i.e. Jbefore a.d. 508-9),^ and that he passed the 
 interval between a subsequent pilgrimage to Eome ® and his mi- 
 
 * Igitur cum ad sacros ordines promotus esset et Presbyteri fungeretur officio, 
 audiens quod gentes quae Aquilonalem plagam Britanniae (i.e. ' y Gogledd ') in- 
 sulae incolebant adhuc gentili errore detinerentur, et quod hi etiam qui videbantur 
 inter eas Christiani non Catholici essent sed diversis haereticorum fraudibtis itre- 
 tirentur, inter paganos atque haereticos de Christi adjutorio confidens coepit illue 
 pergere. . . . Pergebat GiJdas igitur . . . gentemque suam ad veram catholicam- 
 que fidem co7ivertebat. Vita S. Gildae, Acta SS. 29 January, cap. ii. par. 8, p. 675, 
 fo.A. 
 
 * Sanctus igitur Oildas triginta habens annos venit ad qvximdam insulam quae 
 in Beum Visii pagi prospectu sita est ibiqiie aliquamdiu solitariam dtixit vitam. 
 
 , . . Veniens itaque ad quoddam castrum in Monte Reum Vysii in prcspectu 
 maris aitum ibipotioris fabricae construxit numasterium atque in eo claustra coeno- 
 bitali ritu perfecit. Ibid. cap. iii. par. 16, p. 576, fo. A. ^ 
 
 * Eo tempore regnabat Avimericv^ rex per totam Hibemiam qui et ipse misit ad 
 B. GUdam rogans ut ad se veniret, promittens se ipsius doctrinis in omnibus obe- 
 diturum si veniens Ecclesiasticum ordinem in suo regno restauraret: quia pene 
 Catholicatn fldem in ipsa insula omnes reliquerant. Ibid. cap. ii. par. 11, p. 575, ** 
 fo. A. 
 
 * Beatus Gildas Arecluta fertilissima regione oriundus patre Cauno nobilissimo 
 et Catholico viro genitus. Arecluta autem regio cum sit Britanniae pars vocabulum 
 aumpsit a quadam flumine quod Glut nuncupatur a qua plerumque ilia irrigatur. 
 Ibid. cap. i. par. 1, p. 573, fo. A. 
 
 * Beatus autem Gildas, qui et Oildasius, honor et deeus gentis suae futurus et 
 ipse a suis parentibus B. Hilduto traditur imbuendus. Ibid. cap. i. par. 3, p. 573. 
 The editors of the Life remark, p. 574, fo. B. nota i. : Sed cum hie [sc. Hildutus] 
 dieatur sub Arturo rege consobrino suo militasse, is vero in regnum anno 516 evectus, 
 qui pottiit Gildam adhuc puerulum qui anno 493 natus erat, instituigsejam Abbas ? 
 Sed plura sunt in illis Britannicorum sanctorum rebus gestia obscura nee idonea 
 chronologia connexa et fidem supra, A ' trustworthy chronology ' is indeed sadly 
 to seek ; that which is received in reference to Britain in the fifth and sixth cen- 
 turies is certainly ' fidem supra ' as it mainly consists of robust parachropi^ms of 
 fifty or sixty years. 
 
 ' Audiens autem B. Brigida quae ipso tempore insignis erat in Hibemensi 
 tnanens insula . . . famam B. Gildae : misit ad eum nuntium cum verbis depre- 
 catoriis dicens : Gavde Pater sancte ac semper in Domino polle. Obsecro te ut 
 aliquod indicium tuae sanctitatis mihi transmittere digneris ut semper apud nos 
 tua vigeat perenniter memoria. Tunc S. Gildas percepta sanctae virginis legatione 
 propriis manibus formulam fecit fusili opere et tintinnabulum eomposuit secundum 
 petitionem ipsius : et per nuntium quern miserat ei transmisit. Ibid. cap. ii. par. 
 10, p. 675, fo. A. * 
 
 ■ Gildas flliu-s Cau, callidus artifex, ab Sibemensium finibus illuc adveniens 
 
■ ST. GILDAS OF RUYS S8 
 
 gration to Armorica, on the eastern or Gloucestershire bank of 
 the river Wye,' and in a small island of the Bristol Channel, then 
 called Echni, but now known as the Flat Holmes. 
 
 The ample reverence with which the sanctity and the learn- 
 ing of Gildas were long regarded warrants the assumption that 
 each ecclesiastical community with which his labours brought 
 him into contact, or which was a fruit of these labours, would 
 desire to have in its Ubrary its own ' Life of St. Gildas.' Such 
 lives would naturally be compiled with especial reference to the 
 connection of the saint with the community, and to his doings in 
 the region in which that community existed. It is well known 
 that these compilations in the form in which we possess them 
 are separated from the times they chronicle by several centuries. 
 They are necessarily strongest in such particulars as may have 
 been derived from traditions of personal contact, and least reli- 
 able in such as may be regarded as traditions of mere hearsay. 
 Hence the great divergence of Caradoc of Lancarvan from the 
 monk of Euys, and the greater weight to be attributed to the 
 authority of the latter. Personal items of information and 
 remarks respecting the kin and the descent of St. Gildas are 
 much fuller in the hagiography of the Greater Britain than they 
 are in that of the Less ; on the other hand, the notices of the 
 connection of St. Gildas with Ireland, which occur in the lives of 
 the insular saints of his day, invariably refer to his earlier visit 
 to that country. The particulars of his so-called evangelisation 
 of Ireland appear in the Fleury manuscript alone. This is what 
 we might expect, seeing that, with the exception of the time St. 
 
 cum pulcherrima quadam varia campanula unitis noctis hospitium apud Lann- 
 carvan ab illo (i.e. Cadoco) sv^cepit ; qui eandem nolam vehementer intuitus Ulam 
 pulsavit. . . . Deinceps peregrinatus est itidem Gildas Romam cum eadem cam- 
 panula ostenditque earn Romano Rape Alexandra dicens ' Hanc campanulam, a me 
 fabricatam et ab Hibemia hucusque delatam Deo et Sancto Retro in ejusdem altari 
 offeram.^ Vita S. Cadoci, cap. 23, ed. Bees, Camhro- British Saints, p. 59. In 
 discussing this reference to Pope Alexander, Colgan says (Acta SS. Hibem. 29 
 January, p. 178) Cum Alexander I sederit an. 121 et Alexander II an. 1061, loco 
 ergo Alexandro videtur Anastasio legendum. . . . Pope Anastasius was conse- 
 crated 24 November, a.d. 496 ; he died 17 November 498. 
 
 ' Qui (i.e. Oudoceu^) cum vacabat orationi intermixtae ftetibus et singultui 
 advenit quidam, de fratribus dicens ' O pater pie I egredere ut videos ligna qua* 
 tuis aedificiis parata sunt,'' quaeque ut vidit, eece vir bonus et Justus et totius 
 Britanniae Historiographus Gildas Sapiens (ut in historiis nominatur), qui eo 
 tempore conversabatur in insula Echni ducens anchoritaletn vitam, transibat per 
 medium flumen (we read lower that this quaint episode took place ' super ripam 
 fluminis Guy ') navicula cum praedictis lignis ac velut sua portabat quae etiam in 
 media sUva sine aliquo possessore invenerat, dc. (Oudoowy did not regain possession 
 of his timber). Vita S. Oudocei, Liber Landav. ed. Bees, cap. viii. p. 131. Cum 
 Beatus Gildas in insula Echni Deo ministeriis mancipavit degeret, missdlem Kbrum 
 scripsit, Ulumque Sancto Cadoco obtuUt, quum Uliu^ confessor extitit, ideoque 
 codex Ule evangelium Gilde vocatur. Yitft S. Cadoci, cap. 29, Cambro-British 
 Saints, ed. Bees, p. 66. , ' ' 
 
 
34 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 Gildas was engaged in Ireland, the last twenty-four years of bis 
 life were spent in Armorica. Thither he returned from Ireland, 
 presumably direct, for we find no notice of his presence in Cam- 
 bria after the episcopate of St. Oudocwy. 
 
 The anachronisms and the want of harmony in the Lives of 
 St. Gildas and in the hagiographical memoranda concerning him, 
 have excited and perverted to the highest degree the ingenuity of 
 the commentator. Anachronisms which have clearly resulted 
 from the carelessness of the monk of Ruys,'® from the pious frauds 
 of the Glastonbury ecclesiastics," or from the over-zeal of the 
 jealous partisans of the supremacy of St. David,^^ have severally 
 been apprehended and put to the question ; the application of 
 the torture of misdirected criticism has resulted in the expression 
 of error, and the disintegration, so to speak, of the personality 
 of the saint has ensued. His component parts having been mar- 
 shalled by Father Colgan and gathered together in the * Acta 
 Sanctorum Hiberniae ' under January 29, and having been num- 
 bered and severally provided with dates of death, pass across its 
 laborious pages in a fantastic procession of Gildas primus, Gildas 
 secundns, Gildas tertim, Gildas qiiartus, Gildasius, and what not. 
 The labour that would be uselessly entailed upon that inquirer 
 into the history of the remote times in which St. Gildas lived 
 who might entertain the refutation of each error of the Gildasian 
 chronology, is readily appreciable by those who have examined 
 the three chapters on the question in the • Acta Sanctorum ' of 
 the Bollandists, and the lengthy discussion in the ' Acta Sanc- 
 torum Hiberniae ' of Colgan. The writers of ecclesiastical bio- 
 graphy in the present day reconsolidate the numerous Gildases,*' 
 appear to recognise only two saints of this name, and distinguish 
 
 '• The confusion, for instance, between Hilderic and his grandson Hildebert. 
 Vita S. Oildae, cap. iii. par 16. Acta SS. 29 January, p. 576, fo. B. 
 
 " ' Malmesbury appears to have been trammelled by his task. He had a certain 
 quantity of materials placed in his hands in order that he might elevate as much 
 as possible the dignity of Glastonbury : and his critical scepticism seems struggling 
 against the servile performance of his task.' Sir T. D. Hardy, Descriptive Cata- 
 logue, ii. 157. No. 218, Dc Antiquitate Glastoniensis Ecclesiae (written a.d. 1126). 
 
 ''^ At ille (Gildas films Cau) dixit, ' Filiiis qui est in utero istius sanctimonialis 
 majorem gratiam ac potestatcm ordinationemque habet quam ego, quia illi dedit 
 DfiAis privilegium et monarchiam ac bragminationem (sic !) omnium sanctorum 
 Brittanie in etemum ante et post judicium.' Ac, &o. Vita S. David per Bice- 
 marchum, ed. Bees, Cambro-Britt. SS. p. 120. There are some very peculiar 
 printer's errors in this work which are not attributable to accident ; ' bragmina- 
 tionem ' presumably represents ' gubernationem.' 
 
 " Dictionary of Christian Biography, Article ' Gildas.' Sir T. D. Hardy (De- 
 scriptive Catalogue, vol. i. part 1, p. 156) says : ' If it be allowable to analyse the 
 two lives and appropriate to each what will not accord with the supposed time of 
 the other, <m;o 'persons of that name will of course be brought into action ; the 
 latter of whom is considered as the author of the ' Excidium ' though when he was 
 born is still in dispute.' 
 
 \ 
 
ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 35 
 
 them from each other as * Albanius ' and * Badonicus.' To these 
 the latest editor of St. Gildas confined bis attention and required 
 us to distinguish very carefully between Gildas Albanius whose 
 life was written by Caradoc of Lancarvan, and Gildas Badonicus 
 author of the querulous work on the destruction of Britain." 
 
 If the varying and conflicting chronological statements in the 
 lives of St. Gildas be analysed, and if the results be assorted 
 and appropriated to one Gildas or another iil accordance with 
 theory and individual predilection, it is clear that, by such a 
 process of chronological differentiation, two, or three or more, 
 Gildases will be rendered possible. If a Gildas had been born 
 in A.D. 425, and a Gildas had died in a.d. 570, there must have 
 been two of the name at least, as the intervening period of 145 
 years cannot be referred with any probability even to an 
 Armorican Ufetime." The chronological case of those writers 
 who differentiate Gildas Albanius from Gildas Badonicus can 
 hardly be stated more strongly than as follows : — 
 
 Gildas Albanius, son of Navus, a king of either Scots, Picts, or 
 Albanians, was 30 years old when he migrated to Armorica. At the 
 time of his migration Hilderic was ruling the Franks ; Hilderic's 
 reign cannot have commenced earlier than a.d. 464 — the year in which 
 Aegidius, who had been elected guardian of the Franks, met his death. '^ 
 Hence Gildas Albanius was bom no earlier than a.d. 435. He be- 
 came a disciple of St. Patrick, who died a.d. 461, in which year Gildas 
 was in Dyfed and predicted the future pre-eminence of the unborn 
 David to the mother of the latter. In a.d. 495 Grallon is said to have 
 been ruling in Armorica,'^ and in his reign Gildas Albanius founded 
 the monastery of Buys. Here Gildas died, according to some writers, 
 in A.D. 512, but according to the chronographical indications afforded 
 by the Buys ' Life,' his death could not have taken place until a.d. 522. 
 If his birth must be dated in a.d. 135, and his death in a.d. 522, he 
 was eighty-seven years old at death ; truly ' senex et plenus dierum.' 
 
 Gildas Badonicus was bom, according to some writers, in a.d. 516 
 or 520 ; but according to others the siege of Mount Badon (which 
 the former synchronise with his nativity) occurred, not in the year of 
 
 '* Vita S. Gildae auct. Caradoc. Lanncarban. ed. Stevenson, 'Gildas/ Fref. 
 p. vi. London, 1838. 
 
 >« <Dom Manrice shows that aboat one hundred and twenty year» were an 
 ordinary term of human life among the ancient Britons.' Alban Butler, Lives of 
 the Saints, i. 450, note e, reference to Dom Maurice, M&moires sur VHistoire de 
 Bretagne, t. 1, preface. The wonderful longevity of the fifth and sixth century is 
 not confined to the British races : Dr. O'Conor constructed an ingenious theory to 
 account for some among the Scots of Ireland having lived to the age of 300 or there- 
 abouts. 
 
 " Oibbon, Decline and Fail, dtc, chap, xzzvi. 
 
 " Colgan (Acta SS. Eibem. 29 Jan. p. 178, ' Gildasius ') quotes Albert le Grand 
 and Bertrand d'Argentr6 ; and the editors of the ' Arta Sanctorum ' (29 Jan. p. 566 
 fo. B.) quote Albert, Bellarmin, and other writers with reference to the date of 
 Grallon. 
 
86 THR DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 his nativity, but in the forty-fourth year of his age. His death is 
 dated a.d. 570. This date allows him, by one hypothesis fifty-fonr 
 years, and by the other, ninety -eighty years. 
 
 This series of dates respecting Gildas Albanius is so har- 
 monious, so possible when taken collectively, and bo consistent 
 with itself, that it is most remarkable how from different and 
 distinct sources such apparently strong confirmations of demon- 
 strable error should be so readily obtainable. The early date for 
 the birth of Gildas Albanius and consequently all verisimilitude in 
 this chronological scheme rest upon an error of the monk of Buys. 
 Referring to the reception of St. Gildas in Armorica he says : — 
 
 Erat autem tunc temporis parva res regum regnique Francomm, 
 Childericus enim eo tempore Merovei fiUus gentilium errori deditus 
 imperabat Francis : quod ex gestis veterum prudens lector cognoscere 
 potest. Vita S. Gildae, Acta SS., January 29, cap. iii. par. 16, p. 576. 
 fo. A. 
 
 In this passage Hildebert, king of Paris and Orleans, who 
 died A.D. 558, is confounded, owing perhaps to the identity of the 
 initial syllables of their names, with his grandfather Hilderic, 
 who is said to have succeeded to the rule of the Mere-wioings in 
 A.D. 458. The connection of St. Gildas with Conomor,'* who 
 was slain in a.d. 559, the year after the death of Hildebert, 
 requires us to reject the synchronisation with Hilderic made 
 in the Euys Life. The expression tunc temporis parva res must 
 refer, not to the commencement of Hildebert's reign as king of 
 Paris, a.d. 511, but to the extension of his authority in a.d. 522, 
 caused by his absorption of the kingdom of Orleans upon the 
 death of his brother Hlodomer. Before a.d. 522 the territories 
 of Hildebert could not have marched with the territories 
 of the continental Britons. The notoriously great control 
 which Hildebert exercised over the Britons, both in temporal 
 and in ecclesiastical matters, must be dated later than 
 that year. The statement that Gildas Albanius was a disciple 
 of St. Patrick, is derivable from no other authority than the 
 Glastonbury archives, which do not enable us to identify either 
 saint. The statement in the * Life of St. David,' concerning the 
 preaching of the son of Caw and his prophecy respecting St. 
 David, cannot, apart from the fact that Gildas Albanius is said 
 
 '* Erat ergo in illis diebus quidam tyrannus nomine Conomerus in superioribus 
 partibus illius regionis. Vita S. Gildae, auctor, monach. Ruyens. Acta SS. 29 
 January, cap. iv. par. 22, p. 677, fo. A. Chrammis in Britanniam fugit ad, Cono- 
 brem comitem Britannorum. Chramnus a Chlotario patre siio captus cum UTore 
 et Uteris in Britannia igne concrematur. Conober comes Britannorum interfectiis 
 est. Fredegar, Epitomata. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, dc, ed. Bouquet, 
 tome ii. p. 404. These evente occur immediately after the death of Hildebert, 
 which took place in a.d. 558. Compare also Vita S. Samsonis, lAber Landav. ed. 
 Bees, pp. 24, 25. 
 
ST. GILDAS OF BUYS. 37 
 
 to have been son of Navus, require any serious consideration. 
 The date assigned to Grallon has grown out of the system of 
 Gildasian chronology adopted; the connection of St. Gildas 
 of Ruys with Conomor undeniably links Gildas, Conomor, and 
 Grallon to the middle of the sixth century. As there were more 
 Grallons *' counts of Cornouailles in Brittany than one, the 
 identification of the saint whose duality is hypothetical only, 
 does not depend upon the chronology of the count but the con- 
 verse is the case ; the identification of Grallon depends upon the 
 chronology of the saint. Cymric authorities know of one Gildas 
 only, who was son of Caw and disciple of St. Iltyd the Knight. 
 
 The Buys Life informs us that St. Gildas was warned in a 
 supernatural manner of his approaching end. On the octave of 
 that warning he received the last oflSces, and in parting words of 
 advice and exhortation addressed those of his disciples who were 
 gathered together around him. He admonished them not to 
 contend among themselves for the possession of his relics, but 
 after his death to place his body in a barque, to push the vessel 
 forth into the sea, and to leave the determination of his last 
 resting-place to the winds and waves and the will of God. On 
 the fourth day of the Kalends of February he gave up the ghost, 
 old, and full of days. His disciples carried his body to the shore 
 and did as they had been commanded to do. They waited for 
 three months, when, after a three days' fast — 
 
 cuidam ex eis revelatum est qnando et ubi inveniendus esset. Igitur 
 cum dies Rogationum essent et ipsi orationis gratia ad quoddam ora- 
 toriolum venissent, invenerunt navem in aestuario quod vocatur Eroest 
 (Groes ti ?), id est domus sanctae crucis, cum sancto corpore integro et 
 illaeso sicut ab ipsis collocatum fuerat in navi. Dies autem ilia, quae 
 est quinto Idus Mail, ab illo tempore usque ad praesens tempus, cele- 
 berrima colitur et servatur apud provinciales Venetenses.'^* 
 
 In the * Annaies Cambriae * the death of St. Gildas is chron- 
 icled thus : * Annus CXXVI. Gildas Britonum sapientissimus 
 obiit.' This dates the death of St. Gildas eight years after the 
 migration of St. Columba to Alban. We are, however, unaware 
 if the anni of St. Gildas are computable in the same era as are 
 those of St. Columba. Hence the only positive data which we 
 possess, and which might enable us to assign the year of St. 
 Gildas' s death, are — first, the statement in the Life that it 
 occurred in a year in which one of the three Eogation days fell upon 
 
 " Gradlon mur, Gradlon flain, and Gradlon plunevor were respectively third, 
 eighth, and twelfth king or count of Cornouailles. Cartulary of Landevenec, ed. 
 Dom Maurice, quoted by Chevalier Pitre, La Bretagne ancienne et modeme, 
 chap. iii. Paris, 1844. 
 
 " Vita S. Gildae, auctor. monach. Buyens. Acta SS. 29 January, cap. v. par. 
 33, p. 579, fo. A. . • 
 
•J 
 
 38 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 May 11 ; second, that it occurred in the sixth century ; and third, 
 that it occurred in the one hundred and twenty-sixth year of an 
 era yet to be determined. 
 
 In calculating the year of the obit of St. Gildas from these 
 data, it would appear to have been customary to render the 
 statement in the Life, * cum dies Rogationum essent,' by — upon 
 Rogation Sunday. The inventio of the barque containing the 
 body of the saint is consequently dated Sunday, May 11, a.d. 570. 
 This day, as Easter fell upon April 6 in this year, may have 
 been called Rogation Sunday, but it is not one of the Rogation 
 days; these days being Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday next 
 before Ascension day. The disciples of St. Gildas, we are told 
 in the Life, fasted three days ; then the time and place of the 
 inventio are revealed ; and when the Rogation days arrive, the 
 barque is discovered in the haven. From these data it may be 
 presumed that the disciples of St. Gildas fasted Thursday, Friday, 
 and Saturday before Rogations, that on Rogation Sunday the reve- 
 lation occurred, and that the discovery of the barque took place as 
 soon as the Rogation days were come, i.e. on Monday. Hence, as- 
 suming as we undoubtedly should, that the data afforded by the 
 Life for marking the day of the inventio are correct, we must reject 
 the commonly accepted year 570 for the obit, as one that does not 
 fulfil the meagre requirements of our chronographical indications. 
 
 Li the * Annals of Tighernach ' we find the short note, 
 ' Kal. ii. Gillas quievit.' The year calendared by Tighernach is, 
 if the Kalends be those of January, an impossible year ; if the year 
 commences secunda feria, May 11 must occur in a common year 
 on Friday, and in a leap year on Saturday. Of these, neither 
 is a Rogation day, consequently we must reject Tighernach's 
 notice, in the form in which it has been handed down to us. 
 Dr. O'Conor's transcript may be incorrect ; as the predicaments 
 *.u.' may be *.ii.* and '.ii.' may be *.u.', are admittedly always 
 present in the most ancient Irish manuscripts, we may amend 
 
 * Kal. ii ' to * Kal. u.' A common year commencing quinta feria 
 requires May 11 to fall on Monday, a bissextile year commenc- 
 ing thus requires May 11 to fall on Tuesday. Both of these are 
 Rogation days. a.d. 570 commences quarta feria ; when we 
 deduct the Cambrian Annus from it we get a.d. 445, for the 
 Annus I. of the era in which this item is computable. This year 
 is not, however, the Annus I. of any era. We must consequently 
 seek a year which, when reduced by the Annu^ given in the 
 
 * Annales Cambriae ' shall indicate an actual era in which the 
 obit of St. Gildas must be computed. 
 
 If the day of the inventio, v Id. Mai., were Monday, then 
 Easter fell April 5 ; if Tuesday were v Id. Mai., then Easter fell 
 April 4 ; if Wednesday were v Id. Mai., then Easter fell April 3. 
 
' V'" 
 
 .ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 39 
 
 Easter fell upon April 6, by the computation of XIX, in 543 
 (1. XV.), 554 (1. xvij.), 565 (1. xviij), 676 (1. xx.) ; it fell upon 
 April 4 in 549 (1. xx.) ; and it fell upon April 3 in 522 (1. xxj.), 
 595 (1. xviij.). Of the two years last named, 622 and 695, the 
 former year, in addition to indicating the possibility of a British 
 Easter upon March 27 (1. xiv.), is too early, and the latter year 
 is too late. Of the other years, it is only in 549 and 576 that 
 the computation of the British Churches could result in an in- 
 correct observance. That is, in these years, as the schismatics 
 sometimes celebrated on the xiij of the moon of DionysiusExiguus, 
 they may have celebrated on March 28 and March 29, respectively. 
 Eeducing each of the years indicated by r Id. Mai. secunda feria, 
 and by v Id. Mai. tertia feria, by the Cambrian Annus, must, if 
 that Annus be correct, give as a remainder an actual era and 
 thus indicate to which year we must assign the obit of St. Gildas 
 of Buys. A.D. 543 minus CXXVI = a.d. 418; a.d. 549 minu^ 
 CXXVI=A.D. 424 ; a.d. 554 mimis CXXVI=a.d. 429 ; a.d. 565 
 minus ,CXXVI = a.d. 440 ; a.d. 576 minus CXXVI = a.d. 451. Of 
 the years thus computed only one indicates the first year of an 
 era. This era is a.d. 429, that of the first and undoubted coming 
 of St. Germanus to these shores. It is an era largely used in the 
 ' Annales Cambriae,' and especially in the notices relating to St. 
 Columba. We may therefore safely accept the guidance that it 
 affords us, and date the discovery of the vessel containing the 
 body of St. Gildas of Buys, on Bogation Monday, May 11, a.d. 
 554 ; eight years after the departure of St. Columba from Ireland. 
 Tighernach calendars the death of St. Gildas * Kal. ii.' four 
 years before the first centenary of St. Patrick's death, which 
 year he calendars * Kal. uii.' a.d. 461 plus 100 = a.d. 561 sep- 
 tima feria. * Kal. ii.,' therefore, indicates a.d. 657, and Kal. u., 
 to which we have perhaps unnecessarily emended it, a.d. 554. It 
 must be pointed out here that, if we compute ' Annus CXXVI * 
 in the false era of the coming of St. Germanus, we must assign 
 the death of St. Gildas to a.d. 671« This year is ii of XIX, 
 Sunday letter D. Easter falls March 29 (l.xviij) and requires the 
 Bogation days to fall May 2, 3, and 4. The incidence of the xiv 
 of the Paschal moon forbids us to suppose that the British 
 Churches in 671 kept Pasch on April 5 (l.xxv), and consequently 
 demands the rejection of a.d. 446 as the era-year, because a.d. 
 571 does not agree with the requirements of our data. In a.d. 
 554, the true year of the obit, the lunar worth of April 5 being, 
 by XIX, xvij, that of March 29 was x and that of April 12 was 
 xxiiij. Consequently, the British Churches in this year, if they 
 did not celebrate Easter upon the same day as the Church of 
 Bome, must have computed by a cycle whose new moons either 
 preceded those of the Dionysian cycle by 4 days, or else were 
 
40 THE DATE OF THE OBtT OF \ 
 
 later than those new moons by 4 days. Whether such a cycle 
 could have existed among a people not deficient in powers of 
 observation, and whether it would have been followed by them 
 after its errors became manifest, are points which do not require 
 investigation. 
 
 n 
 
 THE DATE OF THE VISIT OF ST. GILDAS 
 TO KINO AINMIRE 
 
 The chronological difficulties which hinder the progress of 
 the inquirer into the circumstances of the legendary period of 
 British history, are never more strongly opposed to him than 
 when he attempts to synchronise a system of chronology adopted 
 by one of the races of the British Isles with a system adopted 
 by another race. When the length of a reign or of a lifetime is 
 greatly extended, the incongruities between the systems either 
 become less assertive or disappear entirely from view; when, 
 however, the length of a reign is as short as is that of Ainmire, 
 the king who received St. Gildas in Ireland, and when the Cymric 
 indications cannot possibly be assimilated to the Erse chronology, 
 the asperities of the problem would appear to be insurmountable. 
 The death of Ainmire mac Setna is assigned to a.d. 571 and his 
 accession to a.d. 568 ; the death of St. Gildas is assigned to a.d. 
 570, and his visit to Ireland to a.d. 565. These years we have 
 discovered to be impossibh years for those events of St. Gildas's 
 life which are referred to. The correction that we have made in 
 the date of the death of St. Gildas attracts the limit of his life- 
 time still farther away from the possible influence of Ainmire, if 
 the accepted chronology of that king's reign be even approxi- 
 mately correct. The * Annales Cambriae ' assign the death of 
 St. Gildas, as we have seen, to * Annus CXXVI,' and his migra- 
 tion to Ireland to * Annus CXXI.' Assuming that these events 
 are computable in the same era, we must date the migration of 
 St. Gildas 5 years earlier than his death, i.e. in a.d. 549. This 
 date requires the reign of Ainmire to have taken place some 19 
 years earlier than Irish historians allow. The ferial formula 
 used by Tighernach to indicate the several years of the reign of 
 Ainmire is : Kail, iiii., ui. uii. i. ; the kalends of January of the 
 year indicated by the * Annales Cambriae,' i.e. a.d. 549, fell sexta 
 feria ; this feria also marks the second year in which Ainmire's 
 reign was current. These considerations, supported by the 
 important coincidence of the Cambrian Annug and Tighernach's 
 feria, prompt the inquiries : Do we really know what Tighernach 
 
V ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 41 
 
 is able to teach us if we allow his writings to speak for them- 
 selves, apart from the unfortunate synchronisations which have 
 been imposed upon them — and ought we not to certify ourselves 
 that his teaching is unsupported, before we elect to set his 
 authority aside ? 
 
 One of the chronographical systems which Tighernach 
 received from his predecessors, depended for the indication of its 
 anni upon the notation of the feria of the kalends of January. 
 Such a system, in the hands of annalists who were contemporary 
 with the events they chronicled, could not fail to be correct. 
 When, however, in later times, the work of various annaUsts 
 using different systems of chronography, came to be embodied 
 in one compilation, and some synchronisation with the affairs of 
 foreign nations became necessary, that straightforwardness and 
 unity of procedure which were the only guarantees of correctness 
 in ferial chronography being broken, this system of dating mani- 
 festly became liable at periods of chronological uncertainty to 
 degenerate into guesswork and confusion. For instance, Ainmire 
 succeeded in a year commencing quarta feria ; in the Solar cycle 
 of 28 years which envelops the succession of the feriae, each 
 feria recurs four times. Quarta feria is found marking the 
 kalends of January at 2. 8. 19. 25. Without exact indications 
 of bissextile position, the entry of an event synchronised from a 
 single and isolated note of quarta feiia, might easily result in a 
 parachronism of 5 or 6, or more years. If the ferial notice be 
 accompanied by the indication of bissextile position, the year to 
 which it must be assigned can only occur once in 28 years ; if it 
 be accompanied by the figures denoting lunar age, the year 
 which is thereby indicated occurs but once in 95 years ; if the 
 bissextile position of the/<?na, as well as its lunar worth is given, 
 then the year indicated occurs once only in 682 years. In 
 addition to the constant source of error arising from the omission 
 to indicate bissextile position, a less frequently occurring one is 
 to be found in the fact that the chronographical data relating to 
 an event taking place in the middle of a year (e.g. the death of 
 St. Columba, Sunday June 9, Sunday letter F) may not include 
 the very necessary item that the year to be noted is a leap year. 
 In such a case the chronologer having only four years to select 
 from must unavoidably fall into error, because not one of these 
 four years can be the correct year, inasmuch as each is a common 
 year. If, however, we get the notice that * Kal. iiii ' dating the 
 year of the accession of Ainmire (Eal. iiii., ui. uii. i.) marks a 
 leap year, then we can have no hesitation, and provided the 
 chronology of the period does not vary more than 27 years from 
 the truth, we are certain of having correctly dated this event 
 when we assign * Kal. iiii.' Sunday letters E D, to a.d. 548. 
 

 42 
 
 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 The chief factors, then, which guide and correct us in our 
 consideration of the ferial chronology of Tighernach are these : 
 
 a. The inter-bissextile sequences ; 1, next after the hiatus ; 2 and 
 8, those in which the death of Ibar and the death of Tuathal are 
 calendared ; 4, that in which the accession of Aiamire is calendared ; 
 6 and 6, those in which the death of Baedan mac Nindeadha, and the 
 death of Maelcobha are calendared. 
 
 b. The obit of St. Ibar, 
 
 c. The obit of St. Bride. 
 
 d. The obit of St. Ciaran of Cluain mic nois. 
 
 e. The obit of Diarmaid. 
 /. The reign of Ainmire. 
 
 g. The centenary notices of the death of St. Patrick. 
 h. The obit of Aed mac Ainmireach. 
 
 A logical method of procedure with respect to the ferial 
 chronology of Tighernach would require the extraction of the 
 signatures of the Kalends, which are prefixed to the regal and 
 other obituary notices examined, and their direct synchronisation 
 with those years of the Christian era which are necessarily 
 determined by them. The numerous strictures, however, made 
 by Irish writers during a period of about sixty years (!) respecting 
 the inaccuracy of an editor whose work was published in 1825, 
 prevent us from adopting so obvious a course, and require us to 
 seek the support and confirmation of other authorities before 
 allowing us to accept the feriae as they are printed by that 
 editor (Dr. 0' Conor). 
 
 Dr. 0' Conor dated the first year after the hiatus in the 
 manuscript of Tighernach {i.e. Kal. u.), a.d. 489. As the feriae 
 continue u. — .uii., ii. iii. iiii. u., it is clear that this is incor- 
 rect. Kal. uii., marking a leap year, requires BA for the dominical 
 letters of the year. These letters mark the year 6 of the Solar 
 cycle. A.D. 489 is year 22 of the Solar cycle ; therefore * Kal. u.* 
 marks either a.d. 470 or a.d. 498 as the first year after the 
 hiatus. The other sequences selected appear in tabular form as 
 follow : 
 
 Obit 
 
 Ferial sequence 
 
 Sunday 
 Letters 
 
 Year of 
 Solar cycle 
 
 A.D. 
 
 Year assigned 
 by Dr. O'Conor 
 
 Ibar 
 
 Tuathal 
 
 AiniPire 
 
 Baedan 
 
 Maolcobha 
 
 ii. iii. iiii. u. 
 iii. iiii. u. ui. 
 iiii. u. ui. uii. 
 iiii., ui. uii. i. 
 
 u. ui. uii. i. 
 
 u. ui. uii. i. 
 
 DC 
 CB 
 BA 
 ED 
 AG 
 AG 
 
 9 
 21 
 
 5 
 25 
 17 
 17 
 
 _ 1 
 
 493 
 
 504 
 
 - 544 
 
 566 
 
 587 
 615 
 
 476 OP 504 
 488 or 516 
 528 or 556 
 548 or 576 
 568 or 596 
 596 or 624 
 
 The centenary notices respecting the death of St. Patrick are considered» 
 pp. 39, 56. 
 
 \ 
 
ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 43 
 
 h.-The Obit of St. Ibar. 
 
 Kal. iii. [next after a leap year] Bass Esp. Jubair IX Kal. Maii, 
 t5[uju]s aetas ccc. iij annorum erat. Tighemach. Fol. 7, col. 2. 
 Ed. O'Conor, Tom. II. p. 127. 
 
 Annus LVII. Episcopus Ebur pausat in Christo anno cccl aetatis 
 suae. ' Annales Cambriae.' 
 
 Annus LVII in the era of the coming of St. Germanus (a.d. 
 429 plus LVII) = A.D. 485, which year agrees with Tighernach's 
 entry in being next after a leap year and in commencing tertia 
 feria. The Irish annalist did not treat this interval as one in 
 the era of St. Patrick ; as he gives the day of the month upon 
 which St. Ibar died, in all probability he had independent data 
 to guide him. Easter fell in a.d. 485, by XIX, on April 21 
 (l.xx), two days before the day to which the obit of St. Ibar is 
 fixed by Tighernach. 
 
 Six years after the death of Ibar we have : 
 
 * K. iii. Bass Lugdach mc Laeghaire Bigh Temrach.'*' Tighemach. 
 Fol. 7, col. 2. Ed. O'Conor, Tom. II. p. 127. 
 
 This entry is against a feria next before a leap year, which 
 agrees with a.d. 485 plu^ 6, and requires us to date the death of 
 Lugaid A.D. 491, which commences tertia feria. The Annals in 
 the * Book of Leinster ' *^ assign 22 years to Lugaid's reign ; Dr. 
 O'Conor assigns 25 years. As the battle of Ocha, in which 
 Ailill Molt, the predecessor of Lugaid, was slain, occurred 43 
 years from St. Patrick's arrival in Ireland,'^ i.e. in (433 plus 43rd) 
 A.D. 475, Lugaid's reign did not extend beyond its seventeenth 
 year. Can * XVII ' have been misread * XXII ' in transcribing 
 from the authority reproduced in the * Book of Leinster ' ? Dr. 
 O'Conor assigns 5 years to an interregnum ^* between Lugaid's 
 
 " Lugaid died a.d. 508 according to (1) Roderick O'Flaherty, Begum Hibemiae 
 Christianorum quadraginta octo Catalogus. Ogyffia, seu Rerum Hibemicarum 
 Chronologia, pars iii. cap. xciii. p. 429. According to (2) Charles O'Conor, D.D, 
 in 508, Catalogus Ghronologicus Begum Christianorum Hibemiae. Epistola 
 Nuncupatoria, Berum Hibemicarum Scriptt. Vett., torn. i. p. Ixxv. (3) • Annales 
 Inisfalenses ' ex autographo Bodleiano, ed. O'Conor, Prolegomena, torn. 1, p. ix. 
 (by interval) a.d. 502. (4) 'Annales Inisfalenses' ed. O'Conor, ex codice Dub- 
 liniense, torn. ii. p. 14 (by interval) a.d. 508. (5) ' Annales IV. Magistrorum,' ed. 
 O'Conor, torn. iii. p. 137, aj). 503. (6) • Annales Ultonienses,' ed. O'Conor, torn. iv. 
 p. 11, A.D. 506. Begnal intervals in the preceding authorities ; 25, O'F. and O'C, 
 Annal. Inisfal. (Bodleian) 20, Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin) 25, IV. Magistr. 25, Annal. 
 Ulton. 24. The Catalogus Ordinum Sanctorum, ed. O'Conor, torn. ii. p. 162, has 
 ♦ Lagad. qui uii annis regnavit,' For ' uii ' read ' xvii.' 
 
 « The Annals extracted from the ' Book of Leinster,' ed. Whitley Stokes, D.C.L. 
 LL.D., The Tripartite Life of Patrick, p. 513. 
 
 *» Extracts from the ' Book of Lecan,' ed. Whitley Stokes, The Tripartite Life 
 of Patrick, Introd. p. cxxiv. 
 
 « O'Flaherty, p. 429, Quinque annorum interregnum. A line or two lower 
 O'Flaherty refers to another opinion : Quinquenne interregnum ante et annorum 
 
44 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 - . i 
 
 death and Muirceartach's accession, and 21 years to Maircear- 
 tach's reign. The Annals in the * Book of Leinster ' date the 
 death of Muirceartach 24 years after the death of Lngaid. 
 Tighernach calendars Lugaid's death * Eal. iii.' and the death of 
 Muirceartach'" ' Kal. u.*; Kal. iii. (Lugaid's obit) plus 3 (inter- 
 regnum) plm 21 (Muirceartach's reign) plus 6 (the bissextiles in 
 24 years) = Eal. u. (Muirceartach's obit). Hence the Annals in 
 the ' Book of Leinster ' and Tighernach are in agreement in 
 assigning 24 years to the interval between Lugaid's death and 
 the death of Muirceartach. a.d. 491 (Lugaid's death) plus 24 
 BsA.D. 515 for the death of Muirceartach. This year commences 
 quintaferia and again supports Tighernach. 
 
 Tuathal Maelgarbh ^ reigned 11 years ; Kal. u. (Muircear- 
 tach's obit) plus 11, plus 3 (the bissextiles in 11 years) = a.d. 526, 
 quintaferia, for Tuathal's death. With ihiBferia Tighernach is 
 in agreement. Moreover, as Diarmaid reigned 21 years and died 
 in a year commencing tertiaferia, Kal. iii. minus [21 plus 5, (the 
 bissextiles in 21 years)] = Kal. u. for the obit of Muirceartach, 
 which agrees with the note in Tighernach. 
 
 c.-The Obit of St. Bride. 
 
 In his paper on the date of St. Golumba's death the writer 
 demonstrated that the death of St. Bride, from the * Historia 
 Brittonum ' and the * Annales Cambriae,' must be dated a.d. 508. 
 Tighernach corrects this and indicates that the year of St. 
 Bride's death is a.d. 508-9. 
 
 Kal. u. Kal. ii. Dormitatio S. Brigidae Ixxxviii. aetatis suae vel Ixx. 
 tantom ut alii dicunt. Tighernach. Fol. 7b. col. 1. Ed. O'Conor, 
 Tom. IL p. 130. 
 
 If Tighernach had computed this entry from the ' Annales 
 Cambriae ' we should expect to find St. Bride's obit calendared 
 quinta feria, i.e. Annus LXXVII in the era of St. Patrick's 
 advent {4S3 plus LXXVII) = a.d. 509, quintaferia. Eal. ii., 
 which indicates aa.d. 507, 518, 524, 529, may, however, be an 
 
 viginti unius regnandi spacium Murcherto datum D. Waraei authoritate ex an- 
 fioMbus Ultoniensibica habemtts. Qui vero 24 annos Murcherto ascribunt. Inter- 
 regni annoa inter eos numerant : praeter interregni enim spacium viginti tantum 
 annos regni complevit et partem unius. This makes the interregnum three years 
 and part of a year, and agrees with Tighernach. 
 
 M MuiBCEABTACH died A.D. 533, 'O'Flaherty; 534, » O'Conor ; »Annal. Inisfal. 
 (Bodleian), 527 ; * Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin), 533 ; <> Annal. IV Magistr. 527 ; • Annal. 
 Ulton. 533 vel 535. Dr. Beeves (Life of St. Columba, ed. 1857, p. 251), dated this 
 obit 534. Begnal intervals: >5 and 21", ^5 and 21, *25, '25, »24, '5vel G 
 and 21 vel 23. 
 
 •• Tuathal Maklgabbh died a.d. 644, 'O'Flaherty; 544, * O'Conor; * Annal. 
 Inisfal. (Bodleian) 541; «Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin) 544; * Annal. IV Magistr. 538; 
 •Annal. Ulton. 543. Dr. Reeves (Life of St. Columba, ed. 1857, p. 68, note i.) 
 544. Regnal intervals ; ' 11, ^ 10, U4, Ul, Ul, « 8 vel 10. 
 
 
 ^S^- •'■'5 
 
 r^ 
 

 ST, aiLDAS OF BUYS ■/ y:.-K':'^:- 
 
 error for Eal. u. ; on the other hand it may be the /em of the 
 Kalends of September, a.d. 508. 
 
 The interyals which are connected with the date of the obit 
 of St. Bride are: first, the intervals from Patrick's death, 83 
 years * Lebar Brecc,' ^'' 30 years according to Gilla Goemain * 
 and the * Quarta Vita ^ Sanctae Brigidae,' and 60 years or 40 
 years according to the ' Historia Brittonnm ; ' and second, the 
 intervals from St. Bride's death to Diarmaid's death, 40 years 
 according to the chronological poem of Gilla Coemain, and from 
 St. Bride's death to the battle of Cuiledremne, 36 years, * Lebar 
 Brecc' The ' Quarta Vita ' further informs us that St. Bride's 
 death occurred during the reign of Muirceartach mac Earca. 
 The first series of intervals, with the exception of the interval in 
 the ' Lebar Brecc,' dates the death of St. Bride in the same year 
 as the nativity of St. Golumba, and assigns both these events to 
 A.D. 621. A.D. 491 (the year of St. Patrick's death according to 
 Gilla Coemain, i.e. 58 years from his arrival in Lreland [433 pltLs 
 58] = 491) plm 30 = a.d. 521, the commonly accepted year of 
 St. Columba's nativity, 461 (the true date of St. Patrick's obit) 
 plus 60 = A.D. 521. The interval in the ' Lebar Brecc ' appears 
 to recognise the fact that some years intervened between St. 
 Columba's birth and St. Bride's death. If we date St. Bride's 
 death a.d. 521, we cannot include it within the reign of Muir- 
 ceartach as dated above. The actual period during which Muir- 
 ceartach reigned, i.e. a.d. 494 to a.d. 515, does include the year 
 of St. Bride's death as assigned to a.d. 508-9. The 'Lebar 
 Brecc ' assigns 36 years from St. Bride's death to Cuiledremne, 
 and 35 years from Cuiledremne to St. Columba's death ; the 
 chronological poem of Gilla Coemain assigns 20 years from St. 
 Bride's death to the death oC Tuathal, 20 years from the death 
 of Tuathal to Diarmaid's death, and 33 years from Diarmaid's 
 death to Columba's death. The * Lebar Brecc ' therefore, by its 
 intervals, dates Cuiledremne (a.d. 580 minus 35) a.d. 545, and 
 St. Bride's death (545 minus 86) a.d. 509. Gilla Coemain, by 
 his intervals, dates Diarmaid's death (580 minus 33) a.d. 547 ; 
 Tuathal's death (547 minus 20) a.d. 527 ; and St. Bride's death 
 (527 minus 20) a.d. 507. 
 
 *' Extracts from the * Lebar Brecc,^ ed. Whitley Stokes, Tripartite Life of 
 Patrick, p. 563. 
 
 *• The Chronological Poem of Oilla Coemdin, ed. Whitley Stokes, Tripartite 
 Life of Patrick, p. 536. O'Flaherty considered this poem, and also {Cap. XCII. 
 Begum et Subregum Hibemiae Syrwhronismus rectae chronologiae restittitua) the 
 Synchronisms of Flann ; O'Flaherty's method of treating intervals was entirely 
 Procmstean when he found that they would not otherwise serve to strengthen and 
 affirm his chronological system. 
 
 * Acta SS. i'ebruary 1, p. 171, fo. B. 
 
 
46 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF ' 
 
 d. — The Ohit of St. Ciaran. 
 
 Kal. uii. Nativita3 S. Ciarani filii Artificis. Tighemach, fol. 7, 
 col. 2. Ed. O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 128. 
 
 K. u. Tuathal Maelgarb mc Cormuic Caech mc Cairpri mc Neill 
 R. Temrach a torcair [slain]. Ciaran mac an t saoir obiit xxxi an. 
 aetat. suae, Tighemach, fol. 7b. col. 2. Ed. O'Conor. Tom. 11. p. 188. 
 
 Annus C. Dormitatio Ciarani. ' Annales Cambriae.' 
 
 Tighemach synchronises the nativity of Ciaran with the 
 death of the Pope Symmachus ; this Pope died a.d. 514, whose 
 Kalends of January fell quarta feiia. Hence 'Kal. uii.' in 
 O'Conor may stand for * iiii.' Reducing the year of the papal 
 obit by 17, gives a.d. 497 as the year of the birth of Ciaran. 
 As Ciaran died in his thirty-first year, Kal. iiii. plm 31, plus 7 
 (the bissextiles in the period of 81 years) = Kal. uii. for the year 
 of Ciaran's obit. Tuathal Maelgarbh died a.d. 526, Kal. u., how- 
 ever. Computing with the Cambrian Annus in the era of St. 
 Patrick's advent, 433 jjZms C= A.D. 532. This year commences 
 quintaferia, consequently in synchronising Ciaran's obit with 
 Tuathal's obit, Tighemach antedated it by 6 years according to 
 era, but by two years only according to feria. Kal. u. (433 pins 
 C) minm 5s=Kal. uii. for Ciaran's* obit, which /ma agrees with 
 that computed above. Kal. uii. = a.d. 528; * Annus C in the 
 era of St. Germanus {i2,9 plus C)=a.d. 628; a.d. 497 (Ciaran's 
 nativity) plus 31 (his age at death) =a.d. 528. 
 
 ^.—The out of Diarmaid.^^ 
 
 K. iii. Justinus Minor r. xi an. Diarmait mc Carbaill occis. 
 Tighemach, fol. 8, col. 2. Ed. O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 149. 
 
 The accession of Justin the Less took place in a.d. 564, a leap 
 year ; ' Kal. iii.' occurs next before a leap year ; hence we must 
 deduct the parachronistic period of 17 years from 564, which 
 gives A.D. 547 for Diarmaid's death. This year is supported by 
 the intervals referred to above in (c). Diarmaid reigned 21 years 
 and died in a year commencing tertia feria. Kal. u. (the date of 
 Tuathal's death) plus 21 plu^ 5 (the bissextiles in 21 years) =Kal. 
 iii. According to Adamnan ^' the migration of St. Columba oc- 
 curred in the second year after the battle of Cuiledremne. The 
 date of St. Columba's migration being a.d. 546, which commenced 
 secunda feria^ we must date the year of tertia feria a.d. 547. The 
 addition of Diarmaid's regnal period of 21 years to the year of 
 
 w DURMAiD died A.D. 565 • O'Flaherty ; 565, « O'Conor ; • Annal. Inisfal. {Bod- 
 leian) 560; * Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin) 566; » Annal. IV Magistr. 558; «Annal. 
 IJlton. 564 vel 571. Dr. Reeves {Life of St. Columba, ed. 1857, p. 68, note i) 565. 
 Regnal intervals : • 21, « 21, » 19, '21, » 20, • 21. The • Catalogus Ordinum Sane- 
 tprum ' says 30. 
 
 »' Life of St. Columba, ed. Reeves, ' Secunda Praefatio,' p. 108. 
 
ST. GILDAS OF RUYS 4T- 
 
 Tuathars death likewise reqnirea ns to date Diarmaid*s death 
 A.D. 547. Gilla Goemain assigns 33 years to the interval 
 between Diarmaid's death and St. Golumba's death ; 580 minu» 
 33= A.D. 547 again. The * Lebar Brecc* is also in agreement 
 with this ; it fixes the interval between the battle of Guiledremne 
 and the death of St. Golumba, at 35 years. 580 minm 35 = a.d. 545 
 for Guiledremne in the second year before St. Golumba's migration. 
 545 plus 2nd=A.D. 546-7. The accepted chronology of the sixth 
 century dates the death of Diarmaid, notwithstanding this con- 
 sensus of indication, in a.d. 565. This year does not even agree 
 with Tighernach's feria. Dr. Whitley Stokes ^^ speaks of 
 Tighernach as * the most trustworthy and the most ill-used of 
 Irish chroniclers ; ' the date of the obit of Diarmaid would 
 certainly afford the fullest support (if support were needed) to 
 both these contentions. 
 
 The Annals in the * Book of Leinster ' assign only one year, 
 to the reign of Domhnall and Feargus ^^ who jointly succeeded 
 Diarmaid. Theferiae in O'Conor run i. i. iii. iiii., uii., ui. uii. i. ii. 
 As Diarmaid died in a year commencing tertia feria, if Domhnall 
 and Feargus reigned only one year we must date their death in 
 a year commencing quarta feria, i.e. in a.d. 548. * Kal. uii.,' 
 therefore, cannot denote the Kalends of January, and it is clearly 
 redundant in the ferial succession given above. The Annals in 
 ,«v the * Book of Leinster ' make Baetan and Eochaid precede 
 
 Ainmire '* and assign to them a reign of three years. Tigher- 
 nach differs from this and says : 
 
 K. uii, \l^e iiii.]. Bass Domhnaill me Muircertaigh mc Earca c, 
 [cui] successit Ainmire mc Setna. [Here follow Kail. ui. uii. i.] Kal. i. 
 Bass Ainmireach mc Setna R, Er, Eochaig 7 Baetan a righi. 
 Tighernach, fol, 8, col. 2. Ed, O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 160. 
 
 The regal order, as it appears in Tighernach, is the order of 
 succession best supported by chronological considerations. Fol- 
 lowing Tighernach therefore, as Ainmire ^* succeeded in a.d. 548, 
 the second year (current) of his reign saw the reception of Gildas in 
 
 »2 Tripartite Life of Patrick. Introd. p. cxxvij. 
 
 " Domhnall and Fbabgus died a.d. 566, ' OTlaherty ; 566, * O'Conor ; • Annal. 
 Inisfal. {Bodleian) 562 ; ^AnnaL Inisfal. {Dublin) 566 ; * Annal. lY Magistr. 561 ; 
 • Annal. Ulton. 565 vel 572. Dr. Beeves {Life of St. Columba, ed. 1857, p. 251) 
 566. Regnal intervals : > 1, «1, • 2, ♦ 1, * 3, • 1. ' Catalogue Ordinum SS: vii. 
 
 ** Authorities supporting Tighernach in placing Ainmire before Eoohaid and 
 Baetan : ' Annal. Inisfal.' {Bodleian) and ' Annal. Ulton.' Authorities supporting 
 the Annals in the • Book of Leinster ' : • Annal. Inisfal.' {Dublin), ' Annal. IV 
 Magistr.' Dr. Beeves followed ' Annal. Ulton.' in dating Eoohaid and Baetan after 
 Ainmire {i.e. in a.d. 572, ♦ Chronioon Hyense,' Life of St. C. ed. 1857, p. 370 ; p. 40, 
 note a) but was apparently undecided respecting Ainmire's date. 
 ' " Ainmire died a.d. 571, 'O'Flaherty; "571, O'Conor; «Annal. Inisfal. {Bod' 
 
 leian) 565; * Annal. Inisfal. {Dublin) 572; * Annal. IV Magistr. 566; «Annal. 
 
 D 2 
 
 ^ V 
 
■jjiwy-i 
 
 48 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 Ireland in * Annus CXXl/ a.d. 429 plus CXXI=a.d. 549 which 
 commences sexto, feria. Kal. i., in which the third year of Ainmire's 
 reign was completed, must therefore be dated a.d. 551, three years 
 before the obit of St. Gildas (a.d. 554) which, as we have seen, is 
 calendared by Tighernach • Kal. ii.,* ^hich should be * Kal. Jan. u.' 
 As Baetan and Eochaid ^ died in the third year of their reign, 
 and as their death is calendared by Tighernach — 
 
 K. ii. Da h. [two sons] Mairedaigh i. Baetan mc Muiredaigh 
 7 Eoch. find mc Domhnaill, iii. regni sni. Tighernach, fol. 8, col. 2. 
 Ed. O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 151— 
 
 we must again correct the feria and for * K. ii.' read — Kal. i. plus 
 Splits 1 (the bissextile indicated by Tighernach at Kal.iiii.)=Kal. 
 u., A.D. 554. Baedan mac Nindeadha succeeded." His death is 
 calendared : 
 
 K. uii. Baedhan mc Nindedha mc Duach mc Conaill Gulban Bigh 
 Temrach occis. Tighernach, fol. 8 b, col. 2. Ed. O'Conor. Tom. II. 
 p. 156. 
 
 ' Kal. uii.' occurs in an inter-bissextile sequence already 
 referred to, in which Kal. L marks the leap year. Prima feria 
 marking a leap year indicates either a.d. 568 or a.d. 596. Hence, 
 as Baedan died Kal. uiL, next before a, leap year, the accession of 
 Aed mac Ainmireach must be dat^d in jld. 567. 
 
 h. — The Obit of Aed mac Ainmireach. ^^ I 
 
 K. 1. Cath Duin bolcc la Brandub mc Eachach co laing hi. iiii. id. 
 en, [iv Id. Januar.] ubi cec. Aed mc Ainmirech Ei Er. anno r. xix, 
 aetat. Ixiii. Tighernach, fol. 9, col. 1. Ed. O'Conor^ Tom. II. p. 160. 
 
 Ulton. 568 vel 575. Dr. Reeves {Life of St. Columba, ed. 1857, p. 32, note e) 571 ; 
 but in • Genealogical Table of Early Abbots of Hy ' ibid. p. 342, Table, p. 251, and 
 p. 40, note a, Ainmire's death is Elated 569. Begnal interval : 3 years in all 
 authorities numbered, and also in Dr. Beeves. 
 
 "Baetan and Eochaid died 668, 'O'FIaherty; 568, «O'Conor; 'Annal. 
 Inistai. (Bodleian) 569; «Annal. Inisfal. (Dttbiin) 569; * Annal. I V Magistr. 563; 
 
 • Annal. Ulton. 671 ; Dr. O'Conor remarks here (Annal. Ulton. p. 25, note 3 to 
 An. DLXVni), ' Regnavit Ainmirech annis 3 cui successerunt Boethan et Eochan 
 ann. 3 uti patet ex Tigemacho Cod. Bodl. foil. 9 et 10.' Notwithstanding this 
 note Dr. O'Conor followed O'FIaherty in making Ainmire succeed Baetan and 
 Eochaid. Regnal intervals : ' 2, * 2, » 4, < 3, » 2, • 3. 
 
 « Baedan died A.D. 572, 'O'FIaherty; 572 «O'Conor; «Annal. Inisfal. (Bod- 
 leian) deest\ * Annal. Inisfal. (D«AMn) 673; 'Annal. IV Magistr. 567 ; 'Annal. 
 Ulton. 585. Dr. Reeves (Life of SL Columba, ed. 1857, p. 371, and Genealogical 
 Table, p. 342) dated the death of Baedan, 586. Regnal intervals : '1, «1, »-, * 1, 
 ' 1, * 14 (but una anno in text). 
 
 « Aed mac Ainmireach died 698-9, "O'FIaherty; 599, «O'Conor; «Annal. 
 Inisfal. ( Bodleian) 598 ; * Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin) 600 ; * Annal. IV Magistr. 594 
 
 • Annal. Ulton. 697. Dr. Reeves (Life of St. Columba, ed." 1857, p. 39, note c) 
 dated the death of Aed, a.d. 698. The Annals in the ' Book of Leinster ' date Aed 
 ' dxx : . uiii.' ; Dr. Stokes reads here 'dxcviii.' If for • dxxviii ' we read 'dlxxviii,' 
 i.e. A.D. 678, we agrde with Tighernach inasmuch as the kalends of January 578-9 
 fell 2>rima feria. Regnal intervals : ' 27, « 27, « 29, * 27, * 27j « 12. 
 
ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 
 
 The synchronisms of Flann ^ assign an interval of five years 
 between the death of Aed and the death of Aedan mac Gabrain. 
 The * Annales Gambriae ' have * An. GLXIII. Aidan map Gabran 
 moritur;' a.d. 429 plus GLXIII =a.d. 691 for Aedan's death. 
 Now 591 mintis 6, and 567 (the year of Aed's accession) plus 
 XIX, both equal a.d. 586 for Aed's obit. The death of Aed 
 is calendared prima feria next before a leap year, which can 
 only mark at this period a.d. 579. In addition to this dis- 
 crepancy, if we date Aed's death in 586, we are unable to 
 find room for the four or six years' reign of Golman and 
 Aed Slaine ; *® moreover their death is calendared * Kal. iii./ 
 which marks at this period either 586 or 592. After Gohnan 
 and Aed Slaine, Aed Vairdhneach*' succeeded; his death is 
 synchronised with that of Phocas, emperor of Constantinople, 
 in a year commencing quinta feria.. 
 
 E. u. Aedh Uairdhneach mc Domhnaill B. Temrach obit. Focas 
 m. [est]. Maelcoba regnare incipit. Tighemach, foL 9, col. 2. Ed. 
 O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 181. • 
 
 Phocas died a.d. 610; the /ma in Tighemach occurs next 
 after a leap year ; therefore the death of Phocas is entered 
 against the correct feiia but in the wrong sequence, a.d. 610 
 minus 17= a.d. 593 for the death of Aed Vairdhneach. 
 
 E. i. Maelcoba mc Aedha m. [est]. Tighemach, fol. 9b. ool. 1.. Ed. 
 O'Conor. Tomll. p. 183. 
 
 The three-years reign of Maelcobha*^ is calendared, in a 
 sequence already referred to, u. ui. uii. i., which marks either 
 593 to 596, or 621 to 624. Consequently if we should date Aed 
 mac Ainmireach a.d. 586, and Colman and Aed Slaine a.d. 592, 
 we are not able to allow more than one year to Aed Vairdhneach. 
 The Annals in the * Book of Leinster * still further increase this 
 confusion. They assign 36 years to the interval between 
 Diarmaid's death and the death of Aed mac Ainnureach, and 
 
 •• These ' Synchronisms ' are given in Chronicles of Picts and Scots, ed. Skene, 
 p. 18, from the ' Book of Lecan ' and other MSS. collated therewith. 
 
 M Aed BLAINE and Coluam bihedha died a.d. 605, * O'Flaherty ; 605, * O'Conor ; 
 ■Annal. Inisfal. {Bodleian) 607; ^Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin) 606; *Annal. IV 
 Magistr. 600 ; * Annal. Ulton. 603. Dr. Beeves {Life of St. Columba, ed. 1857, 
 p. 372) 604. Begnal intervals : ' 6, * 6, » 9, « 6, » 6, • 6. 
 
 ♦' Aed vairdhneach died a.d. 612, • O'Flaherty ; 612, * O'Conor ; • Annal. 
 Inisfal. (Bodleian) 614; «Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin) 613; * Annal. IV Magistr. 607; 
 •Annal. Ulton. 611. Begnal intervals : ' 7, *7, » 7, « 7, * 7, • 8. 
 
 ** Maelcobha died a.d. 615, • O'Flaherty; 615, «O'Conor; «Annal. Inisfal. 
 (Bodleian) 616; * Annal. Inisfal. (DtAlin) 616: » Annal. IV Magistr. 610; 
 •Aimal. Ulton. 614. Dr. Beeves (Life of S. Columba, ed. 1857, Genealogical 
 Table, p. 342) 615. Begnal intervals : ' 3, ^ 3, »2, ♦ 3, » 3, " 3. 
 
50 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 consequently date the death of the latter in (a,d. 547 plus 36) 
 A.D. 583 ; this allows of these Annals assigning only three year» 
 to the reign of Colman and Aed SlMne. Flann assigns 36 
 years to the interval between Diarmaid's death and the death 
 of Aed max; Ainmireach, but extends the interval between 
 Aed's death and the death of his son Donald to 63 years. If 
 we accept Tighemach's feria * Kal i ' = 579, for Aed's death we 
 must alter * anno r. XIX ' to * anno r. XIII ' (a,d. 567 j:iits XII I' 
 = 579). This permits us to date the slaughter of Colman and 
 Aed Slaine Eal. iii., a.d. 586 ; and indicates that Flann mistook 
 Aed Slaine for Aed mac Ainmireach but that he gave the correct 
 interval, five years namely, between the death of Aedan mae 
 Gabrain in a.d. 591, and the death of Aed Slaine in a.d. 586. 
 The Annals in the *Book of Leinster,* by regnal intervals 
 from Diarmaid's death amounting to 36 years, date the death 
 of Aed mac Ainmireach in 547 plus 36= a.d. 583, four years 
 too low ; the synchronisms of Flann likewise date Aed's death 
 in 583 ; GiUa Coemain dates the death of Maelcobha 20 years 
 after the death of St. Columba, 580 plus 20= a.d. 600, four 
 years too low; Flann assigns 63 years to the interval from 
 Aed's death to Donald's death, 579 plus 63= a.d. 642, four 
 years too low again. 
 
 Maelcobha was succeeded in a.d. 596 by Suibhne Mend." 
 To Suibhne's reign the Annals in the ' Book of Leinster ' assign 
 16 years; Dr. O'Conor assigns 13 years, XVI and XIII 
 respectively. 
 
 K. uii. Suibne Mend mc Fiach. oc. Domhnall mo Aedha R. 
 Tighemach, fol. 9b, col. 2. Ed. O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 189. 
 
 This entry occurs in the following ferial position : ui.i.i.ii., 
 uii., u.ui.uii., ii.iii.iiii.u. From this it is clear that ' Kal. uii., 
 is a misreading of Kal. iiii. Quarta feria after a leap year marks 
 either a.d. 609 or a.d. 637. Suibhne's death must therefore be 
 dated a.d. 609 after a reign of 13 years. 
 
 K. u. Bas Domhnaill m. Aedha m. Ainmireach R. Er. i. fine Jan. 
 xiiii. regni sui. Tighemach, fol. 10, col. 1. Ed. O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 194. 
 
 Kal. u., after a leap year, indicates a.d. 621, which date 
 would only allow Donald mac Aedha ** a reign of 12 years. In 
 
 *' SoiBHNB Mend died a.d. 628, ' O'Flaherty ; 628, « O'Conor ; » Annal. Inisfal. 
 (Bodleian) 630; * Annal. Inisfal. {Dublin) 629; * Annal. IV Magistr. 623; 
 • Annal. Ulton. 627. Dr. Reeves (Li/e of St. Columba, ed. 1857, p. 374), 628. 
 Begnal intervals : ' 13, =» 13, « 14, * 13, » 13, • 13. 
 
 ** Domhnall mac Aedha died a.d. 642, 'O'Flaherty; 642, * O'Conor; 'Annal. 
 Inisfal. (Bodleian) 641; «Annal. Inisfal. (Dublin) 643; «Annal. IV Magistr. 639; 
 •Annal. Ulton. 641. Dr. Reeves (Life of St. Columba, ed. 1857, p. 375), 642. 
 Begnal intervals : ' 14, *14, * 11, * 14, » 16, *14. • Catalogus Ordinum Sanctorum 
 Hibemiae,' ed. O'Conor, Tom. II, p. 162, XXX. 
 
.-^ >*. 
 
 ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 51 
 
 tioting the years of the feign of the Emperor Heraclius, 
 Tighernach allowed him * XXII ' years only, instead of 30. If 
 the second X in the numerals giving the reign of Heraclius had 
 been similarly misread, i.e. had it been read II instead of X, we 
 should have had a case exactly parallel to that of Donald. The 
 Annals in the * Book of Leinster ' and the * Catalogus Ordinum 
 Sanctorum in Hibernia,' both assign XXX years to the reign of 
 Donald. Now Kal. iiii. (the obit of Suibhne Mend) plm 30 plus 
 7 (the bissextiles in 30 years) = Kal. ui. a.d. 609 plus 30 = 
 A.D. 639, Kal. ui. Hence, if we date the death of Donald at 
 Kal. u., with Tighernach, we must date it in a.d. 638 ; if we date 
 it at the interval assigned by the Annals in the 'Book of Leinster ' 
 and in the * Catalogus Ordinum Sanctorum ' we must date it in 
 A.D. 639. The sum of the regnal intervals in the Annals in the 
 * Book of Leinster,' from Laogaire's death in a.d. 463, to Donald's 
 death is 195 years. Correcting this by deducting three (the 
 error in the length assigned to Suibhne Mend's reign), we get 
 192 years, a.d. 463 plus 192= a.d. 655, which is 17 years 
 lower than the true date indicated by Tighernach's feria. The 
 error in Tighernach is a double one ; the date of Lugaid's death 
 is synchronised 17 years too low, and this error is balanced at 
 the close of the period by the disappearance of 17 years from 
 the reign of Donald mac Aedha which carry along with them the 
 obituary notice of Fearchar king of Alban who reigned 16 years 
 and died a.d. 624. 
 
 The consideration of the figures and dates contained in the 
 ootnotes which severally relate to the Irish kings of the sixth 
 century, clearly indicates that the trusted connection and con- 
 tinuity of the accepted chronology of this period are apparent 
 only ; and that, in following the erroneous synchronisations of 
 Tighernach and the chronology of O'Flaherty, in preference to 
 reducing to the Christian era that system of ferial chronology 
 which had been handed down to the earliest Irish annahst from 
 still more remote and distant times, Irish historical critics have 
 disregarded trustworthy and contemporaneous evidences and 
 have lent their sanction and their support to a chronological 
 system which when tested at its two most important anni — at the 
 anni of the obits of SS. Gildas and Columba namely — becomes 
 dislocated and crumbles to pieces. 
 
 The necessity for synchronising the reign of Ainmire mac 
 Setna and the visit of St. Gildas to Ireland, has caused a tam- 
 pering with and an adjustment of the regal succession, which, 
 as has been pointed out, has resulted in a very general uncer- 
 tainty respecting not only the dates of that king's reign, but 
 also his place in the regal line. 
 
 In the following Table of the Eeigns of the Christian Kings 
 
52 
 
 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 of Ireland in the sixth century, those emendations of Dr. 0'Ck>iior'8 
 text of the Annals of Tighernach which have been made by the 
 writer are marked f. These emendations, in no case arbitrary 
 ones, are three only in number. 
 
 The Succession of the Christian Kings of Ireland from Laogaire to Domhnall mac 
 
 Aedha. 
 
 
 Length of reign 
 
 Feria assigned 
 
 Death in A n 
 
 
 in years 
 
 by Tighernach 
 
 X/CnUiA *ii ^Lm±fm 
 
 1 Laogaire mao Neil 
 
 85 
 
 ^_„ 
 
 463 
 
 2 Ailild molt .... 
 
 
 12 
 
 — 
 
 475 
 
 8 Lugaid mao Laogaire . 
 
 
 16 
 
 iii. 
 
 491 
 
 An interregnum . 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 4 Moirceartach mao Earca 
 
 
 21 
 
 n. 
 
 515 
 
 5 Taathal Maelgarbh . 
 
 
 11 
 
 a. 
 
 526 
 
 6 Diarmaid mao Feargusa 
 
 
 21 
 
 • •• 
 lU. 
 
 647 
 
 7 Feargus and Domhnall 
 
 
 1 
 
 im.t ' 
 
 548 
 
 8 Aimnire mao Setna . 
 
 
 8 
 
 • 
 
 I. 
 
 551 
 
 9 Baetan and Eochaid . 
 
 
 8 
 
 u.t» 
 
 554 
 
 10 Baedan mao Ninneadha 
 
 
 18 
 
 nil. 
 
 667 
 
 11 Aed mao Aimnireaoh . 
 
 
 12 
 
 i. 
 
 679 
 
 12 Aed Slaine and Colman 
 
 
 7 
 
 iii. 
 
 586 
 
 18 Aed Vairdhneach 
 
 
 7 
 
 n. 
 
 593 
 
 14 Maelcobha mao Aedha 
 
 
 8 
 
 L 
 
 696 
 
 15 Suibhne Mend mao Fiaohraeh . 
 
 18 
 
 uii.t* 
 
 609 
 
 16 Domhnall mao Aedha 
 
 29 
 
 n. 
 
 638 
 
 Feria in O'Conor, uii. 
 
 • Feria in O'Ckmor, li. 
 
 • Feria in O'CJonor, uii 
 
 III 
 
 THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE ECLIPSES 
 IN THE EARLIER PART OF THE ANNALS OF 
 
 TIGHERNACH. 
 
 A THIRD class of dates, that which is connected with the calendar- 
 ing of celestial phenomena, now claims our attention. To this 
 class of dates the writer has given fuller consideration than 
 Dr. O'Conor bestowed upon it, and for the following reason : the 
 eclipses which are noted, and which can be identified, previous to 
 A.D. 638, do not support the writer's contention that we have a 
 parachronism of 17 years in the chronology of the period pre- 
 ceding the feria which calendars the death of the two Donalds. 
 Thomas Moore (* Hist. Ireland,' Vol. 1. Chap. 8) refers to the 
 indubitable fact of Irish chroniclers having from actual and 
 personal observation at the moment, or from some written record 
 of the observation, transmitted to later times, accurate and trust- 
 worthy notes of certain solar eclipses. That the memoranda 
 used by the annalists were contemporary in origin, and accurately 
 recorded, the present writer sees no cause to call in question. 
 The difficulties that exist have arisen from the errors of later 
 writers in transmitting these memoranda to our times. The 
 eclipses of a.d. 664, May 1, at 4 p.m. and a.d. 496 are especially 
 referred to in these terms : 
 
ST, GILDAS OF BUYS 63 
 
 The dates assigned to the several eclipses are, in this and other 
 instances, confirmed by their accordance with the catalogues of 
 ecUpses composed by modem astronomers, with those in the learned 
 work of the Benedictines and other such competent authorities. 
 
 This eclipse in a.d. 496, if exactly noted and correctly trans- 
 mitted to ns, would afford us a most important criterion of the 
 correctness of the earliest Irish annalist at a point where each 
 criteria are most needed. The entry, and the note made upon it 
 by Dr. O'Conor appear thus : 
 
 E. ii. Quies Ouindeda mc Cathbadha, i. mc Cuilind Epis lusca. 
 Defectio Solis apparuit. Gelasius Papa quievit. Tighemach, fol. 7, 
 col. 1. Ed. O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 125. 
 
 Note 2. Obiit Gelasius xi Eal. Nov. anno 496. Mac Cuilin primus 
 Luscanensis Eps. obiit eo anno 496, quo Solis deUquium notat VArt 
 de VMfier les Dates. Tome I. 
 
 A.D. 496, secunda feria, is a leap year ; the ferial sequence in 
 which this entry occurs is uii. i. ii. iii., in which the year com- 
 mencing secunda feria is not a leap year. This discrepancy at 
 once suggests the inquiries : Is the note respecting Pope 
 Gelasius a misplaced addition made by Tighemach to original 
 matter, and, if it be so, must we synchronise the death of Mac 
 Cuilin with the year of the obit of Gelasius, or with the year of 
 the eclipse ? The latter point requires exact consideration because 
 the eclipse of October 22, 496, was not visible in Ireland. The 
 Benedictines note : 
 
 ^ 496, 22 Oct. 4 8 m. Eur. k I'E. Afr. k I'E. As. centr. 65 (34) 
 19-21 A.« 
 
 The extension of these abbreviations, and the translation of 
 this passage apprise us that an annular eclipse of the sun took 
 place on October 22, 496, at 8 o'clock in the morning, calculated 
 for the meridian of Paris ; that it was visible in the east of 
 Europe and of northern Africa, and in Asia ; that it was central 
 on the 5th meridian in 65° N., that it was central at midday in 
 34° N., and that it declined towards the equator as low as 19° N., 
 whence it remounted towards the pole and crossed the 155th 
 meridian in 21° N. 
 
 The longitude of Paris is 2° 20' E., that of Tara is 6° 87' W. ; 
 the difference in longitude being 8° 57', time at Tara is, at four 
 minutes to a degree, nearly 36 minutes earlier than Paris time. 
 The true conjunction on the meridian of Tara must therefore be 
 timed 8 hrs. mintis 36 m., i.e. at 7.24 a.v* The latitude of Tara 
 is 53° 34' N. Now the earliest time at which the true conjunc- 
 tion of a solar eclipse is visible in 53° 34' N. is, in the month of 
 
 * Chronologic des Eclipses. L'Art de Virifier les Dates. Tome L 
 
54 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 October, at 8.37 a.m.*^ As the time of apparent conjunction in 
 the forenoon is earlier than the time calculated, and as there 
 are three *^ other causes which hasten the actual occurrence of 
 the eclipse, and as, moreover, the calculators of the elements of 
 this echpse confine its visibility to the east of Europe and of 
 Africa, therefore the eclipse of a.d. 49& was not visible in Ireland. 
 In what year of this period was an eclipse of the sun visible 
 in Ireland ? The eclipse of 497 was not visible in the north of 
 Europe ; that of 495, at 6.30 p.m. on June 8, was visible in the 
 north-west of Europe. The Chronologie des Eclipses does not, 
 unfortunately, afiford the necessary materials for calculating its 
 track. The item ii. in the ferial sequence uii. i. ii. iii., indicates 
 A.D. 480 as the leap year, and a.d. 479 for the year of secunda 
 feria in which the eclipse is calendared. The eclipse of 479 was 
 not visible in Ireland, however. In the following year the Bene- 
 dictines note : 
 
 4f 480, 27 Mars k 10 m. Eur. Afr. As. k I'O. centr. 45 (64) 86. A. 
 
 An annular eclipse of the sun occurred March 27, 480, at 10 a.m. 
 on the meridian of Paris. It was visible in Europe, Africa, and 
 western Asia. It was central on the 5th meridian in 45° N. ; it 
 was central at midday in 64° N. ; and it crossed the 155th 
 meridian in 86° N. 
 
 In passing over 150° of longitude it mounted 41° towards the 
 pole. As the French calculators made the 20th meridian pass 
 through Paris,^* therefore the 5th meridian is 12° 40' W. 
 [(20-5)-2° 20')]. The meridian of Tara being 6° 37' W. the 
 track of the eclipse mounted in 6° 3' (12° 40' minus 6° 37') only 
 1° 39'. Therefore on the meridian of Tara the eclipse of a.d. 
 480 was central at (10 h. minus 36 m.) 9.24 a.m. in latitude 
 46° 39' N., which is only 6° 55' south of Tara. The eclipse of 
 March 27, 480, was consequently visible over the whole of Ire- 
 land. So too, however, was the eclipse of June 8, 495. 
 
 The next note of an eclipse is as follows : 
 
 K. ui. Defectio solis .... mane tenebrosum. Aed mc Fogar- 
 taigh r. C. s. q. Tighemach, fol. 8b, col. 2. (a.d. 691. O'Conor, Tom. 
 II. p. 158, who affords no note). 
 
 The ferial sequence in which this occurs is iii. iiii. u. ui. This 
 
 *• Vide Table des Limites de Vapparition des Eclipses de soleil, L'Art, etc., 
 tome I, p. 254. 
 
 *' ' Le matin Viclipse de soleil doit toujours arriver plutdt qu'elle n'est mar- 
 quee.' . . . • Plu» le soleil sera pris des instants de son lever . . . plus Vacciliration 
 de V4clipse . . . * L'acceUration de Viclipse, le matin, sera d'autant plus forte que 
 le soleil 6tait plus 6lev6 {sur V horizon] d midi, trois mois auparavant.* UAri, etc. 
 p. 249. 
 
 ** ' En faisant passer le vingtiime miridien par Paris.' L'Art, etc. Tome I, 
 p. 267» 
 
ST, GILDAS OF BUYS 66 
 
 dates the leap year of sextaferia in a.d. 572. The eclipse, how- 
 ever, is again entered at the wrong feria. It cannot have 
 occurred in a year commencing sexta feria in any year between 
 A.D. 583 and a.d. 694. We have here unquestionably, a notice 
 of the eclipse of 690, prima feria. The Benedictines note : 
 
 ^ 590, 4 Oct. k midi Eur. Afr. As. k VO centr. 57 (48) 27. A. 
 
 An annular eclipse of the sun, occurring on the meridian of 
 Paris at midday on October 4, 690. It was visible in Europe, 
 Africa, and western Asia. Its track declined towards the equator, 
 from 12° 40' W. 67° N., to 2° 20' E. 48° N., and it crossed the 
 165th meridian in 27° N. Consequently in passing over (12° 40' 
 W. to 2° 20' E.) 16° of longitude, it declined 9° ; hence in passing 
 over 6° 3' to the meridian of Tara, it declined 3° 38' and was 
 central on that meridian at (12 h. minus 36 m.) 11.24 a.m. in 
 63° 22' N. As Tara is only 12' north of this point, and as the 
 note of the eclipse in Tighernach — mane tenebrosum — indicates 
 the period of the day, those who believe with the writer that 
 these notices in Tighernach had been handed down to his times 
 in native and contemporaneous memoranda, will seek for no 
 other year. The chronological system adopted by the ancient Irish 
 observers in dating these memoranda, however, was clearly not 
 understood by Tighernach, and awaits discovery. Tighernach, 
 hy feria, dated the eclipse of 496 one year too low ; he, however, 
 dated the eclipse of 590 one year too high. 
 The next notice of eclipse occurs : 
 
 K. i. Annus tenebrosus. Tighernach, fol. 9b. col. 2. Ed. 
 O'Conor. Tom. II. p. 187. Note 19 ; Ita etiam Annal. Ult. ad ann. 
 624 aerae com. 625 nempe duo Solis deliquia contigere anno isto ut in 
 VArt de Verifier les Dates, t. 1. et Eclipsis Lunae, omnes Europae 
 visibiles. 
 
 This entry is last in the following ferial succession ; iii. iiii. 
 u. ui., K. ii. f .f ., ui.i. In the second inter-bissextile sequence 
 the paragraphs indicated are not accompanied (in O'Conor) by 
 their feriae. The date of prima feria, third after a leap year, is 
 607 or 636. In the year 607, there was an eclipse of the sun on 
 October 26, visible in the north-west of Europe only. In 624, 
 which commenced prima feria, no eclipse of the sun was visible 
 in Ireland. In the following year the Benedictines note : 
 
 ^ 625, 10 juin ^ 4 et d. s. Eur. enti^re petite en Afr. [Moon] 27 
 mai ^ 4 s. [Moon] 20 novemb. ^ du m. 
 
 Dr. O'Conor's explanation of 'annus tenebrosus' is clearly in- 
 correct ; there was but one eclipse of the sun visible in the norths 
 em hemisphere in 626, and of the eclipses of the moon that 
 which occurred May 27, at 4 p.m., was invisible in Ireland. 
 
56 THE BATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 The next notice of eclipse in Tighernach is : ' ; 
 
 El. [no feria\ Tenebre i. Callain Mai i. hora nona. A morte 
 Patrieii [anno] cc. iii. Tighernach, fol. 10b. col. 2. Ed. O'Conor. 
 Tom. II. p. 203. 
 
 Dr. O'Conor considered the chronology of this eclipse (Prolego- 
 mena, Tom. i. p. cxxxv) and compared the accuracy of Tighernach 
 •with the inaccuracy of Baeda and those chroniclers who followed 
 him (Saxon Chron. and Florence). Dr. O'Conor controverted 
 the opinion that the entry in Baeda was a miscorrection made by 
 a scribe, presumed that Baeda had computed the date by table, 
 and that he had been led astray by his ignorance ; * Ignorabat 
 enim 'annis 19 vertentibus non fieri praecisam aequationem 
 motuum Solis et Lunae et diflferentiam horael, 27', 32", 42'", qua 
 Luna pristinam epocham antevertit, penitus nesciens, erroneis 
 calculis ductus, erravit.' The precision which adopts exact astro- 
 nomical calculations that carry out a periodic difference to parts 
 of seconds of time before computing in the cycle criticised, is 
 singularly at fault. A.D. 664, xix. of XIX, a leap year, has epact 
 18 ; 18 plus 11 (lunar regular of May) = 29; 29pltL8 1 (intercalated 
 day)=l.xxx May 1. This calculation would certainly lead one to 
 expect that the eclipse occurred on May 1, seeing that some hours 
 of the first day of the new moon of the heavens are necessarily 
 comprised in l.xxx. The Benedictines note : 
 
 ^ 664, 1 mai S, 3 et d. s. Eur. Afr. centr. 52-45. T. 
 
 A total eclipse of the sun on May 1, 664, at 3.30 p.m. on the 
 meridian of Paris. Visible in Europe and in Africa. The middle 
 of the eclipse coincided with sunrise in 52° N., and the track of 
 the eclipse crossed the 155th meridian in 45° N. Hence in pass- 
 ing from 165° W. of Paris to 135° E., the track of the eclipse 
 declined 7°. On the meridian of Tara at 2.54 p.m., the ecKpse 
 was central in 48° 20' N. This point is only 5° 14' south of Tara, 
 consequently this eclipse was visible throughout Ireland. The 
 time calculated, i.e. 2.54 p.m., agrees exactly with that noted by 
 Tighernach, i.e. the 9th hour. 
 
 * The reference to St. Patrick at this entry is an incidental 
 proof of the good faith of Tighernach in his reproduction of 
 ancient memoranda. He had already noted in the sixth century 
 * Kal. uii. a morte Patrieii C anni .' a.d. 461, the year assigned by 
 Tirechan and by the 'Annales Cambriae,' pliis 100= a.d. 561, 
 which commenced septima feria and is in agreement therefore 
 with Tighernach. a.d. 461 plus cc.iii=A.D. 664, the year of an 
 eclipse of the sun at the ninth hour of Mayday. 
 
 Three other notices belonging to this class now claim our 
 attention. 
 
I 
 
 ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 67 
 
 E. uii. Tolua Ab. Gluana mc nois. i. do Corcomogha paosat. Stella 
 visa est bora uii diei. Tigbemacb, fol. 9b. col. 1. Ed. O'Gonor. Tom. 
 n. p. 183. 
 
 This /ma occurs in a sequence u. ui. uii. i., and is synchronised 
 with the second year of the Emperor Heraclius, i.e. 612. 612 
 minus 17=595. Kal. prima feria marks at this period a.d. 596 ; 
 therefore we must date the appearance of this comet in a.d. 
 595, which commences septima feria.** In a.d. 443 a comet was 
 visible in Europe during January and February '^ ; in a.d. 519 
 a rayed comet made its appearance in the east.'^' The interval 
 between these two comets is equal to the interval between 519 
 and 595, the year indicated by Tighemach in the entry, under 
 consideration. These two intervals of 76 years strongly point to 
 three appearances of Halley's comet whose period varies between 
 75 and 79 years. 
 
 After the entry of the eclipse of a.d. 664, 9 K.E. appear, fol- 
 lowed (ed. O'Conor, p. 208, Tom. II) by : 
 
 El. H. anno nubes tenuis ac tremula ad sbecie eelestis arcus. iiii. 
 vigilia noctis, v. f . an. [i.e. ante] Fasca ab oriente in sanguinem versa 
 est." 
 
 *• • On vit une eomite en cette annie \i.e. 595] ou enla troisiime annie du rigne 
 de Childibert en Bourgogne. Childihert succida en Bourgogne d son oncle Oontran 
 le 28 Mars, 593.' Pingr^ {Comitographie, in ann. 595). The accoant of this comet 
 in Paulas Diaconas presents very great difficulties, but the Chinese Annals indicate 
 that a comet was seen January 9, 595, and thus clear away all doubts ; ' lea annales 
 Chinoises les font [i.e. Us grandes difficulUs'] absolument disparaltre.' 
 
 •• • A.C. 442. Ind. X. Eudoxio et Dioscoro coss. Stella quae crinita dicitur 
 perplurimum tempus apparuit.' Marcellini Chronicon, Migne, Patrol, tome LI, 
 fo. 927. ' Cometae sidus apparere incipit mense Decembri, quod per menses aliquot 
 visum suhsequentis in pestilentia plagae quae fere in ioto orbe diffusa est, praemisit 
 ostentum.^ Idatii Episcopi Chronicon, Migne, Patrol, tome LI, fo. 881. Compare 
 * K. iv. Stella crinita apparuit,^ followed at the second E. by ' Kl. eclipsis solis in 
 nana hora,'' ' AnnaL Inisfal.' ( Bodleian) ed. O'Conor, tome IL These occur during 
 the reign of Laogaire : ' Kal. iv ' indicates a.d. 441. The eclipse which was visible 
 in Ireland was that of a.d. 445 (L'Art, etc. *20 juUlet d 5 et d. s. Eur. au NO), 
 therefore the entry is two years {hj feria) higher than it should be. As the cal- 
 culated time of the middle of the eclipse at Paris is 5.30 p.m., the middle of the 
 eclipse occurred at Tara at 4.54 p.m. As this was the time of the middle of the 
 eclipse, and the retardation in the month of Joly is not great (cf. rules, L^Art, etc., 
 p. 249), the hour in the Irish chronicle is not necessarily incorrect, t.e. ' hora nana ' 
 
 = 3 P.M. 
 
 *' Eodem anno (519) exortum est in ulterioribus Crientis partibus astrum hor- 
 rendum quod cometam vulgo vocant radium inferius demittens. Chronicon 
 Paschale, translat. Migne, Patrol, Series Oraeca. Tom. xcii. fo. 859. Pingr6 
 (Comitographie, ou Traiti Historique et Th4oriqua des ConUtes, Paris, 1783) gives 
 a list of the Qreek writers who noted the appearance of this comet. 
 
 '^ The various authorities who chronicle this celestial phenomenon speak of it 
 by different names. Pingrd (Com^tographie) enumerates ' une comMe,' ' on feu aa 
 ciel dnrant diz jours,' ' une iris extraordinaire ; ' ' tout ceci [he says] se r^duit pent- 
 dtre k une anrore bor^ale.' The language of the authority reproduced by Tigher- 
 nach is certainly descriptive of the peculiarities of the Northern Lights. 
 
69 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 Accounts of similar phenomena in the first year of the reign of 
 Thierri, king of the Franks, were considered by Pingre to refer 
 to an aurora borealis. The years of Thierri are counted from the 
 commencement of September a.d. 673 ; therefore the following 
 Easter-day, April 2, 674, fell in the first year of his reign. Two 
 K.K. intervene and then we get (ed. O'Conor, Tom. II, p. 210) : 
 
 El. Stella cometes visa est luminosa in mense septemb. 7 octobr. 
 
 This Kl. dates the comet 13 K.K. after the eclipse on the 
 Kalends of May, i.e. in {QQ4^ plus 13) = a.d. 677. The 'Saxon 
 Chronicle' dates this comet, August, September, and October 
 A.D. 678. Both*authorities would thus appear to be incorrect. 
 M. Pingre *^ shows that the appearance of this comet must be 
 dated a.d. 676, and adduces, with other proofs, the agreement of 
 Chinese records which date the appearance of a comet by the 
 equivalents of September 4, 676, 
 
 THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE OF ST. GILD AS 
 
 . . . sedem Petri apostoli immundis pedibus usurpantes, sed 
 merito cupiditatis in Judae traditoris pestilentem cathedram decidentes. 
 Gildae Epistola. Sec. 66, 1. 26, p. 72, ed. Stevenson. 
 
 . . . et Judam quodammodo in Petri cathedra Domini traditorem, 
 . . . statuunt. Ibid. Sec. 67, 1. 8, p. 75. 
 
 Videamus igitur quid Evangelica tuba mundo personans inordinatia 
 sacerdotibus eloquatur, non enim de illis, ut jam diximus, qui apo- 
 stolicam sedem legitime ohtinent. . . . Ibid. Sec. 92, 1. 13, p. 100. 
 
 The foregoing quotations from the epistle of Gildas confine 
 the date of its compilation within the period of three years 
 dating from November 22, 498. On this day " Symmachus, a 
 deacon, was elected and ordained pope in the room of that Ana 
 stasius (called Alexander " in V. S. Cadoci) during whose episco- 
 pate St. Gildas visited Eome. The patrician Festus had returned 
 from CP. between November 18 and 22 ; in furtherance of 
 the designs of the Emperor Anastasius, whose object was 
 uniformity and who desired the outward appearance of unity 
 in the church, Festus brought about by means of bribery the 
 election and ordination of a certain priest named Laurentius 
 
 *» Comitographie, in ann. 676, 677, 678. 
 
 ** Chronologie historique des Papes. L'Art, etc. Tome III. p. 270. 
 ** • Anastasius II. Junior Petri filius Romanus de Regione Exquilina de vico 
 in quo eodem Papa Alexander I. est natus.' Hlstoriae Pontificum, Ciaconius, p. 335. 
 
ST. OILDAS OF BUYS 69 
 
 upon the same day as that which saw the ordination of Sym- 
 machus. The account of Theophanes says : 
 
 (translat. Migne, Patrol. Series Graeca, Tom. 108, col. 842). A.C. 493 
 (=sA.D. 498). Hoc anno Festus Bomam abiturus Anastasium papam 
 ut Zenonis concordiam probaret, se verbis efifecturum Anastasio impera- 
 tori pollicitus est : eum vero non ampHus vivum comperit. Qtiare 
 plerisque peouniarum vi corruptis,* Laurentium quemdam, praeter 
 Romanorum jura, promoveri curavit episcopum, qui etiam sacra ini- 
 tiatus est ordinatione ab adversantium sibi parte altera. Qui rectiorem 
 tuebantur fidem, ab eis divisi^ Symmachum e diaconorum grege 
 quemdam in pontificem consecrant : unde deinceps tumultus, caedes, 
 rapinae urbem triennio divexarunt : donee Theuderichus Afer Boma 
 potitus Meet Arianorum infectus labe, provincialem synodum coegit, et 
 Symmacho in episcopum Bomanum confirmato, Laurentium Nuceriae 
 praesulem instituit. Laurentius quietis impatiens et ciens tumultus a 
 Symmacho dignitate movetui mittiturque in exsilium : ex quo tem- 
 pestas omnis sedata. 
 
 From the narrative of Theophanes it is clear that the eleva- 
 tion of Laurentius to the bishopric of Nuceria fell within the 
 period of three years during which the city of Eome was disturbed 
 by ecclesiastical differences ; that, though in the enjoyment of 
 preferment, he became impatient of inaction and recommenced 
 fomenting disturbances (in Rome ?) ; and that until he was exiled 
 in the third year from the death of Anastasius the violence pro- 
 duced by these differences was not abated. The exact date of the 
 ordination of Laurentius to Nuceria is not preserved ; it cannot 
 however, have been long deferred after the Council of Rome, on 
 March 1, a.d. 499. In view of this assumption, and attaching 
 the most definite meaning to the words of the third quotation at 
 the head of this section, which imply that Laurentius was still 
 only a priest at the time that St. Gildas wrote, we must date the 
 compilation of the Epistle of Gildas to the reguli and the clergy 
 of Britain in the year 499, and, moreover, early in that year 
 rather than late. 
 
 Epistola Gildae (ed. Stevenson). 
 
 BEDEH Sec. 66, 1. 26, p. 72 . . . Sedem Petri apostoli immundis 
 
 CS0BPANTES pedibus usurpantes, sed merito cupiditatis in Judae tradi- 
 toris pestilentem cathedram decidentes ; p. 73, 1. 4 . . . ecclesiasticos post 
 AMBiENTEs hacc gHidus propensius quam regna coelorum ambientes, et 
 TYKANNico - tyraunico ritu acceptos defendentes nee tamen legitimis 
 moribus illustrantes. 
 
 1. 28 . . . quorum de scelerata conversatione multos sacerdotio irru- 
 PECTJNiA entes potius vel illud (pene) omni pecunia redimentes, quam 
 voLUTANTBs tractos, ct in eodem veteri in- (p. 74) faustoque intolera- 
 biUimi piaculorum coeno post sacerdotalem episcopatus vel presbyterii 
 
 iSv: 
 
«'V? 
 
 60 THE DATE OF THE OBIT^OF 
 
 mo sedem qui neo ibidem usqnam sederunt, utpote indigni, 
 
 BBDBBDNT porcorum more volutantes, rapto tantum sacerdotali 
 
 TBNORE nomine, neo tamen tenore, vel apostolica dignitate ac- 
 
 ■ FiDEH cepta; sed qui nondum ad integram fidem, sunt vel ma- 
 
 lorum poenitehtia idonei, quomodo ad quemlibet ecclesiastioum, at non 
 
 dicam summum, convenientes et adepti, gradum, quern 
 
 non nisi sancti atque perfecti, et Apostolornm imitatores 
 
 et, ut Magistri Gentium verbis loquar, irreprehensibiles legitime et 
 
 absque magno sacrilegii erimine suscipiunt. 
 
 Sec. 67, p. 74. Quid enim tam impium tamque scelestum est, 
 quam ad similitudinem Simonis Magi, non intervenientibus licet 
 PBouiBcuis interea promiscuis criminibus, episcopatus officium vel 
 PBBTio presbyterii terreno pretio, quod sanctitate rectisque mori- 
 
 bus decentius acquiritur, quempiam velle mercari? Sed in eo isti 
 propensius vel desperatius errant, quod non ab Apostolis vel Aposto- 
 TTBANKis lorum Buccessoribus sed a tyrannis et a patre eorum diabolo 
 EMTTNT fucata et nunquam profutura emimt sacerdotia ; quin 
 
 potius velut culmen tectumque malorum omnium quoddam, quo 
 non fEbcile eis improperentur a quoquam admissa prisca vel nova, 
 et cupiditatis gulaeque desideria, utpote praepositi multorum facilius 
 rapiant, scelestae vitae structurae superponunt. Nam 
 coEMTioNia si talis profecto coemtionis conditio ab impudentibus istis 
 PETBo non dicam Apostolo Petro, sed cuilibet sancto sacerdoti 
 
 ""°^ (p. 75) pioque regi ingesta fuisset, eadem resppnsa acce- 
 
 pissent quae ab Apostolo auctor eorumdem Simon Magus accepit, 
 dicente Petro, Pecunia tua tecum sit in perditionem. Sed forte heu, 
 quia ambitores istos ordinant, — imo potius humiliant, 
 atque pro benedictione. maledicunt, dum ex peccatoribus 
 non poenitentes, quod rectius fiierat, sed sacrilegos et desperatoa 
 CATHEDBA faclunt, ct Judam quodammodo in Petri cathedra Domini 
 NicoLAuu traditorem, ao Nicolaum in loco Stephani martyris statuunt 
 immundae haeresios adinventorem — eodem modo sacerdotio adsciti 
 sunt. ... 
 
 iNOBDiNATis ^®*'' ^^' P* ^^' ^idcamus igitur quid Evangelica 
 sBDEu Apo- tuba mundo personans inordinatis sacerdotibus eloquatur, 
 sToucAM jjQjj enim de illis, ut jam diximus, qui apostolicam sedem 
 legitime obtinent. . . . 
 
 That Gildas is making particular reference to the Papal 
 schism though addressing the clergy of Britain generally, is clear 
 from the passages nlarked sedem, summum, sedem apostolicam, and 
 PETRO. We find therein references: to the. usurpation of the 
 chair of the apostle Peter ; to the unfitness of certain ecclesiastics 
 for any preferment in the church, let alone for that advancement 
 which would place them in the highest position (* ut non dicam 
 summum ') ; the disclaimer by Gildas of any intention upon his 
 part to speak against such as had legitimately obtained the apo- 
 stolic seat ; and to the futility that should be inherent in the offer 
 of purchasing preferment made to any holy priest or pious king, 
 let alone to the Apostle Peter himself (' ut non dicam Apostolo 
 
 m 
 
t ■■■ 
 
 V. ^ ST. GILDAS OF BUYS '\ \t 
 
 a- 
 
 Petro '), who is particularly the adversary of all such means as 
 those made use of by Laurentius and Festus. 
 
 That Gildas^ refers to a contest is clear from the passages- 
 marked AMBIBNTBS, FIDEM, AMBITOBKS, and SEDEM APOSTOLIOAM, 
 
 wherein he says : ' much more readily canvassing for ecclesiasti- 
 cal preferment than for the kingdom of heaven, and defending 
 after the manner of tyrants those degrees which they had seized 
 upon ; ' with the passage * qui nondum ad integram fidem/ de- 
 scribing those who were unfit for preferment, contrast the cha- 
 racter given by Theophanes of the party of Symmachus : ' those 
 who maintained a more upright faith ; ' the assertion that those 
 who had ordained these canvassers (ambitores) did not thereby 
 render them penitent and contrite with respect to their evil com- 
 munications with heretics (promiscuis criminibus) and their acts 
 of simony, but, rather, more sacrilegious and desperate, and that 
 they did, so to speak, set up Judas the betrayer of the Lord in 
 the chair of St. Peter ; the passage, sedem apostolicam, referred 
 to above, wherein Gildas declares his adhesion to such as had 
 lawfully obtained the apostolic chair. 
 ^ The references made by Gildas to the employment of bribery 
 
 ' and many were corrupted by the influence of money,' Theo- 
 ;; phanes) are necessarily general. Of the passages marked pbcunia, 
 
 I PRBTio, BMUNT, coBMTioNis, PRBTio is strongest, as it exactly 
 
 • describes the condition of Laurentius, who, having through want 
 
 of uprightness countenanced heretics, and having thereby become 
 partaker of and sympathiser with their errors, did, instead of 
 ^ * amending his ways and seeking to obtain preferment in a more 
 
 > fitting manner, endeavour to compass ' episcopatus officium . . . 
 
 [ terreno pretio ' and sought ordination moreover, * . . . non ab 
 
 ^ Apostolis vel Apostolorum successoribus, sed a tyrannis.' 
 
 \ What Gildas says of usurpers generally is much more easily 
 
 particularised : usurpantes in connection with the chair of 
 Peter, and ambientes and ambitores, illustrate the methods of 
 seeking ecclesiastical advancement which were condemned by 
 that council of Rome holden in a.d. 499 ^ by Symmachus, to 
 'e which Laurentius subscribed ; ' tyrannico ritu acceptos defen- 
 
 !f dentes ' indicates the desperate condition of affairs in the city of 
 
 [ * Rome, and the straits to which the orthodox party was reduced, 
 
 %■ 
 
 ** Synodiis Bomana I. ; sub Symtnacho Papa. De tollendo ambitu in comitiis 
 ! * PontificUs. Sacr. Conciliorum CoUectio, Tom. viii. col. 229, Labbe et Cossart. 
 
 Florentiae, 1762. ' Causam habiti concilii indicat Symmachus pontif ex (cap. 2) hit 
 verbis : " Ut episcopalem ambitum et confusionis incertum velpoptdarem tumultum, 
 quern per subreptionem diaboli usurpatiane aliquorum tempore ordinaUonis meae 
 constat exortum communicato pariter tractatu in futwrvm possimus robuste 
 amputare." ' Nota d. Severini Binii, ibid. col. 23R. The decrees of this Sjnod 
 are dated : ' Post consulatum Paulini [Paulin. et Joa in. coss. 498] viri clarissim, 
 KaUndis Martii in Basilica beati Petri ApostoU.' 
 
 E 
 
 ^ .ir 
 
 ^ 
 
02 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF ' 
 
 and the treatment which it received at the hands of the party of 
 Festus and Laurentius (* tumult, slaughter, and robbery,' Theo- 
 phanes) : nec sederunt and tenore indicate that the usurper 
 (Gildas uses the plural throughout) had not enjoyed the apostolic 
 dignity that he had seized upon, and moreover show, as also does 
 the passage inordinatis, that Gildas was writing before Laurentius 
 had been ordainfd bishop of Nuceria (qui nec ibidem usquam 
 sederunt) ; promiscuis : as there were two ecclesiastical parties 
 in Rome in a.d. 498, one of which was desirous of pleasing the 
 emperor and the patrician, it must be presumed that in Lauren- 
 tius Festus had found a priest upon whose subservience he could 
 depend, and who had in all probability made public profession, 
 not only of his willingness to subscribe the Henoticon, but also 
 of his willingness to communicate with those who insisted upon 
 retaining the name of Acacius of CP. in the diptychs. Sym- 
 machus, to the end of his life, steadfastly refused to resume 
 communion with those who had compromised the purity of the 
 faith for the sake of peace with the Monophysites. This un- 
 binding attitude of Symmachus and his party constitutes the 
 ' more upright faith ' referred to by Theophanes ; while, in 
 addition to the assertion made by Gildas that the usurping 
 party — that, namely, of Laurentius — had attained * nondum ad 
 integram fidem,' we get a reference to the pliancy of Laurentius 
 which had brought him to communicate with heretics, and had 
 thereby made him, constructively, a partaker in their errors (pro- 
 miscuis criminibus). In inordinatis Gildas contrasts disordered 
 priests, i.e. such as had rather thrust themselves into preferment 
 than had been drawn by the Spirit (quam tractos), with those 
 who had legitimately gained the apostolic seat. In rapiant we 
 are enabled to form an idea of the character of Laurentius, which 
 is in the closest agreement with that indicated by Theophanes, 
 who says of him, after he had been installed at Nuceria, that he 
 became * impatient of a quiet life and began to foment disturbance, 
 until Symmachus deprived him of his dignity and banished him, 
 after which the times grew peaceful.* 
 
 It might perhaps be maintained, in addition to the fact that 
 any advancement to the episcopal dignity is, in view of the direct 
 spiritual succession of those fitly ordained, an advancement to 
 an apostolic degree, that so diflPuse and wordy a writer as Gildas 
 would perhaps use the words * apostolicam sedem ' in a general 
 way to describe the dignity of any bishop and with no particular 
 reference to the bishopric of Rome. However, we find in the 
 following passage a coupling of the see of Peter with that of 
 Stephen the Martyr, which can leave no doubt that Gildas uses 
 this oft-repeated phrase with reference to one episcopal dignity 
 in particular, which can only be that of Rome. 
 
ST. GILDAS OF BUYS G3 
 
 . . . et Judam quodammodo in Petri cathedra Domini traditorem, 
 ac Nicolaum {sc. quodammodo) in loco Stephani martyris statuunt 
 immmidae haeresios adinventorem. ^ 
 
 Any charges pointing, however indirectly, to irregularity o 
 life, either actual or constructive, in an ecclesiastic connecte 
 with Antioch, could not fail to recall that most childish, if not 
 earliest of heresies with which Antioch is connected ; the heresy 
 namely of Nicolaus of Antioch, one of the seven deacons (Acts 
 vi. 5) who asserted that terrestrial life resulted from the pro- 
 miscuous intercourse of the powers of nature {Hie [i.e. Nicolaus 
 dicit tenebras m concupiscentiu luminis et quidem foeda et ob8>:ena 
 fuisse ; ex hac permixtione pudor est dicere quae foetida et immunda 
 sunt. TertuUian De praesciiptionibus. Migne, Patrol. Tom. 2. 
 col. 63). The step from ' assertores libidinis atque luxuriae ' 
 (TertuUian, adversus Marcion. Lib. I. cap. xxix. Migne, Patrol. II. 
 col. 280) to the account of the origin of the practice by the 
 Nicolaitae in their lives of these libidinous notions, as it appears 
 in St. Augustine {in sectain turpissimam versum est qiva placet usii» 
 indifferensfeminarnm. De Haeresibus, Lib. I. cap. v. Migne, Patrol. 
 Tom. 42. col. 26), was no doubt an easy and a natural one. To 
 which patriarch of Antioch, then, does Gildas apply this name 
 of * Nicolaus,' meaning thereby that which St. Augustine under- 
 stood of Nicolaus rather than that which TertuUian indicated '? 
 
 Stephen,*^ orthodox patriarch of Antioch, who is called 
 * Martyr ' by St. Gildas, was enthroned in a.d. 480, and was 
 cruelly murdered in the following year by the partisans of Peter 
 the Fuller. Calandio, his successor, who is accused of Nestor- 
 ianismi was driven out in a.d. 485, and Peter the Fuller, a 
 Monophysite, a third time thrust himself into the chair of 
 Antioch. In a.d. 484 the first council of Eome, summoned by 
 Pope Felix III., had rejected the Henoticon, or unitive measure 
 of Zeno, and had despatched Yitalius and Misenius as legates to 
 the emperor to inform him of the decision of the council. At 
 CP. these legates prevaricated, communicated with the Mono- 
 physites and pronounced in the diptychs the name of Peter 
 Mongus, the intrusive and Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria 
 {qui haereticorum socius dudum exstitisse probatur et princeps. 
 Simplicii Papae Epistol. 17 Jul. 482). In the next year, a.d. 
 185, at the second council of Rome the condemnation of Acacius, 
 patriarch of CP. was confirmed and Peter the Fuller, the heretical 
 patriarch of Antioch, was anathematised. Peter the Fuller 
 entered into communion with Peter Mongus, and for many years 
 
 *' * Ejecto autem Petro [_sc. the Fuller] StepJtanus Antiocliensis Ecclesiae 
 episcopatum sortitus est; quern Antiochensiuvi pueri calamis instar teloruvi 
 }yraeacutis inter /ecer tint.' Evagrius, Hist. Ecclcs. III. 10, Traaslat. Migne, Patrol, 
 Series Graeca, Tom. 86, pars 2, col. 2614. 
 
64 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF 
 
 the Churches of .CP., Antioch, and Alexandria were shut out from 
 communion with the Church of Eome*'. Calandio of Antioch, re- 
 ferring to Peter Mongus, in letters addressed to the Emperor 
 Zeno and Acacius of CP., speaks of him as an 'adulterer.' H 
 was thus branded ' by construction of (ecclesiastical) law ' inas- 
 much as he had thrust himself upon the Church of Alexandria 
 while Timotheus, the properly ordained * spouse ' of that church, 
 was still alive. Peter the Fuller died in a.d. 488, and Peter 
 Mongus in a.d. 490. Palladius (heretic) succeeded Peter the 
 Fuller in the patriarchate of Antioch and upheld communion 
 with Peter Mongus and his successors. Palladius died in the 
 same year as Pope Anastasius and was succeeded by Flavianus 
 who is referred to by Gildas under the name of Nicolaus. 
 Flavian is considered to have been orthodox ** : it is noteworthy, 
 however, that the charges made against him of sympathy with 
 the Monophysites, and of concealed Nestorianism, were never 
 rebutted by him in a satisfactory manner, and that the vindictive 
 reiteration of these charges eventually resulted in his expulsion 
 from the patriarchate. 
 
 Three years before the accession of Flavianus, i.e. in a.d. 495, 
 three conciliahda ^ of the Nestorians, presided over by Barsumas, 
 Nestorian metropolitan of Nisibis, confirmed the decree of the 
 first Nestorian synod of Seleucia in Persia (a.d. 485), which 
 expressly permitted the marriage of all ranks of the clergy. 
 
 •■ Evagrius, H. E. III. 16, ibid. Petnis autem cognomettto Fullo, qui ante 
 Calandionem [patriarch 481-5] ac Stephanum [480-1], utjam dixi episcopus fuerat 
 Antiochiae, sedem suam recuperavit. Qui quidem et Zenonis Henotico subscripsit, 
 et litteras synodicas dedit ad Petrum Alexandrinae urbis episcopum. Cum eodem 
 Petro Alexandriae episcopo Acacius qu^ue Cpus. episcqpus communumem iniit . 
 Ibid. Cf. article Peter Monous, Dictionary of Christian Biography. 
 
 " Le Quien, Oriens Christiantis, Tom. 11. col. 729 ; Pagi, nota viii. in ann. 
 496, Baronius, Annales; Acta SS. July 4, col. 22. De SS. Flaviano et Elio 
 Antiochiae et ffierosolymae episcopis ; Article Flatiam, Dictionary of Christian Bio- 
 graphy. The 0cUtor8 of the Acta SS. say of these Saints, ' antiquis omnibus Fasti 
 ignoti — ob dubiam fidem \ ' speak of their own writing discussing them as ' com, - 
 m^ntarius apologeticus,' and head their second chapter : Sanctorum Vindici 
 adverstis Theophanem dUosque. Theophanes, Chronographia (translat. Mi 
 Patrol. Series Graeca, Tom. 108), in An. 491 (i.e. a.d. 498). ' Palladio Antiochi 
 prafistdfi defuncto Jmperator [sc. Anastasius] Flavianum presbyterum et ejusdem 
 ecclesiae tnifsum, in mortui locum d$signavit, quern Oialcedonensibus decreti 
 mentem oppositam tenuisse narrant.' The editors of the Acta SS. are opposed to 
 this, and Pagi, in the note referred to above, quotes this passage and adds : ' sed 
 rumor ille falsus erat ut ex dictis liquet.' Evagrius {H. E. III. 23, translat. 
 Migne, Patrol. Series Graeca, Tom. 86, pars 2, col. 2646) saya : ' mortu/) posthaec 
 Palladio Antiochensis Ecclesiae antistite Flaviantis cum in ejus locum, successisset, 
 Salomonem Antiochenum presbyterum, misit Alexandriam, qui synodicas ipsius 
 perferret et Joannis vicissim litteras flagitaret.' This Joannes is Joannes Haemul a, 
 Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria, of the party of Peter Mongus. He occupie d 
 the chair of Alexandria from a.d. 496 to a.d. 507. 
 
 •• Chronologie historique des Conciles. L'Art, etc. Tome II. in ann. 485, 49 
 499. 
 
 
. ST. GILDAS OF BUYS 66 
 
 Joannes, Calandio, and Flavian, patriarchs of Antioch, bad all 
 been accused of sympathy with Nestorianism, and Nestorius him- 
 self, before he became patriarch of GP. was intimately connected 
 with Antioch, the city of the 'Kbidinous Nicolaitae ; ' the Nestor- 
 ianism of these patriarchs and of Flavianus, actual or alleged, 
 had no connection with the phase of Nestorianism which was 
 due to Barsumas, but which, however, was certainly the most 
 salient feature in the characteristics of this sect when viewed, in 
 the last decade of the fifth century, from the celibate standpoint 
 of the monks of the West. It would be in vain to seek for dis- 
 crimination in so diffuse a work as that of Gildas, who at the 
 time he wrote was very young and evidently given up to over- 
 much blaming. Consequently we find that Gildas permitted 
 himself, in judging of the truth or of the falsity of the allegations 
 made against Flavian of Antioch of being in sympathy with 
 Peter Mongus the 'adulterer,' and of sympathy with Nestorianism, 
 i.e. with a sect, among other things, opposed to the celibacy of 
 the clergy, to be dominated and directed in his choice of epithets 
 by the Augustinian view of the heresy of the deacon of Antioch. 
 The result was that the judgment of Gildas became crystallised, 
 so to speak, in the title of *Nicolaus' which he applied to 
 Flavian, and by which he undoubtedly intended to convey the 
 idea of immorality. That Flavian was the victim of not a few 
 false rumours is clear from the epithet applied to him by Gildas ; 
 that there is any ground, however, for rejecting the authority of 
 Theophanes with respect to statements of the unorthodox views, 
 or rather actions, of Flavian concerning the decrees of Ghalcedon, 
 is nowhere apparent. The determination of the Emperor Ana- 
 stasius to bring about unity in the Church in appearance, in 
 A.D. 498, as far as the Boman episcopate was concerned, is matter 
 of history. Equally unquestionable is the opinion that Anastasius 
 would have chosen another instrument for his purposes at 
 Antioch had Flavian's attitude been one of unbending orthodoxy. 
 That Flavian was opposed, under direction, to the decrees of 
 Chalcedon, is proved by the fact of his addressing synodical 
 letters to the Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria immediately 
 upon his own preferment to the chair of Stephen the Martyr. 
 That Flavian resumed communion with orthodox bishops, that 
 he afterwards confessed the true faith, and that he suffered 
 thereby is equally clear.^^ The method of operation adopted by 
 the Emperor Anastasius in Antioch is exactly parallel with the 
 method adopted by his friends at Bome in the same year ; pUant 
 ecclesiastics of doubtful, or at least vacillating, orthodoxy rather 
 
 •' Liberatus Diaconus, Breviarium, cap. 18, Migne, Patrol. Cursus, Tom. 68, 
 eol. 1029 ; Evagrius, H.E., III. 31, translat. Migne, Patrol, Series Graeca, Tom. 86, 
 pars 2, col. 2658. 
 
 ff 
 
 * : ■ .-« 
 
66 THE DATE OF THE OBIT OF ST. GILD AS 
 
 than of clearly defined heresy, were in each instance selected, 
 and it was no doubt hoped that the influence of prelates who 
 were not unorthodox, and who submissively sympathised with 
 one of the contending parties in the Church while they main- 
 tained communion with the other, might at length bring about an 
 appearance of unity, resulting in the toleration by the West of that 
 denial of the twofold nature of the Son which had been exalted 
 into an article of faith by some of the bishops of the East. 
 
 I.' •■ 
 
 Errata. 
 
 Tract I. p. 11, note 15, for ' Enneadecaeteridis ' read ' Enneadecaeteridos ' 
 „ p. 18, last line, for ' viii ' read ' xix ' 
 
 *" 
 
'■ ■'^i. 
 
 ■■I: 
 
 M 
 
 P 
 
 -«1 
 
 
 3 5- 
 
 : ft '-' 
 
 ■ 1*3" 
 
 3-^ ."J 
 
 g * H o 
 
 . -g 35 ^2 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 
 CO 
 
 -§ 
 
 00 
 
 ■>* 
 i ® 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 O 
 
 rt CO '^ 
 
 
 
 >S 
 
 53-35 
 
 §■■ 
 

 \ 
 
 
 ■<«#' 
 
 ^ 
 
 .#■"'•■ 
 
 "v 
 
 
 f' 
 
 •. ^.1*^- 
 
 1-. ■. 
 
 *f'J^^ 
 
 -^ 
 
 \ 
 
 
 «r«* 
 
 ,4 -\ 
 
 • N!f 
 
 
 ."^ 
 
 ■ I A ■ 
 
 > • 
 
 ■ 'i^^v 
 
 
 • k V . -• 
 
 
 r-Vi 
 
 ■iS' 
 
 
 ■•^■ 
 
 ^ A 
 
 -♦•>-. 
 
 ■^ .-i* 
 
 'i-i-- -'■'■ -) 
 
 
 «B,- 
 
 >V'- 
 
 
 
 •■*■■ 
 
 1 *■ ■ -1 
 
 ', '•■ '. T>'- 
 
 
 
 -T 
 
 ■|^' 
 
 
 -■■:,:-"F;' 
 
 ■ -fe*,... JC5'- *ifc^.- 
 
 -%■ 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 ii3if:^ss:?t«t3v;i 
 
 1 ^^^mg^ 
 
 m 
 
 mi% 
 
 "^^^^^Ms^^--- 
 
 . j< 
 
 im^ 
 
 /^ 
 
 
 
 ...^^.^ 
 
 
 ^^i^--:-: ■■:JC5>^ 
 
 s^.. 
 
 
 sfs'*^ 
 
 
 
 ■^"^5^ 
 |-:^: 
 
 
 .: '■■■"?;-:U^.'V,7t?! ;>■■ ■-■:■:^• ■ ■Ts^^' '•■-- «S' -^Sv 
 
 ii 
 
 
 
 ^S^ 
 
 
 SJi? 
 
 ''^rf 
 
 \ ii: