Boulogne-Sur-Mer Part 5

"The stout Gadalians first the courage try At Sliabh-mis, and rout the enemy: Where heroes pierced with many a deadly wound, Choked in their blood, lay gasping on the ground: Heroes whose brave exploits may justly claim Triumphant laurels and immortal fame."

Scota, the relict of King Milesius and mother of Heber and Heremon, Kings of Ireland, was slain while fighting in this battle, and buried in the valley at the foot of Mount Sleabh-mis, which after her interment was called Glean Scoithin, or the Valley of Scota. From her the Irish Scots derived their name. The same old bard has sung a lamentation over her grave:--

"Beneath, the vale its bosom doth display, With meadows green, with flowers profusely gay, Where Scota lies, unfortunately slain, And with her royal tomb gives honour to the plain.

Mixed with the first the fair virago fought, Sustained the toil of arms and danger sought: From her the fruitful valley hath the name O Glean Scoith, and we may trust to fame."

ST. PATRICK'S FLIGHT TO MARMOUTIER, DESCRIBED BY PROBUS.

IN the XIVth section of the "Vita Quinta" Probus narrates St. Patrick's arrival in Brotgalum, then his journey to Trajectus, from whence he hastened to Marmoutier to join St. Martin, Bishop of Tours, with whom he remained for four years. Colgan, in his annotations (14), identifies Brotgalum as Burdigalum, or Bordeaux. So, too, does Professor Bury, who tells us that Brodgal was the Irish for Bordeaux, and that "Bordeaux was a regular port for travellers from Ireland to South Gaul" ("Life of St. Patrick," Appendix, p. 341).

Trajectus, according to the old maps, was situated on the river Dordogne, about sixty miles from Tours. From Trajectus St. Patrick had to walk a distance of about two hundred miles through a desert before reaching Tours.

"A glance at the map of ancient Gaul," writes Father Bullen Morris, "will show that in St. Patrick's time a great part of the country between Trajectus and Tours well deserved the name of a desert. The network of rivers, tributaries of the Loire, and now known as La Vienne, La Claire, La Gartempe, &c., must have exposed the country to periodical inundations in those days. So from Tours in the north to Limonum, Alerea, and Legora in the south, east and west, we find some 5,000 square miles, which, as far as the ancient map is concerned, give no signs of possession by man. Travellers entangled amidst these rivers and mora.s.ses must have advanced very slowly, and thus it appears that both places and time fit in with St. Patrick's narrative. Nature has changed her face along the line of St. Patrick's journey, and there is little now to remind us of its primeval desolation, save that the rivers still preserve some of their old habits, and now and then combine with the inundations of the giant Loire in setting man at defiance.

"Time, however, with its alternative gifts and ravages, has left untouched the traditions regarding St. Patrick's journey. There is something more than antiquarian interest in the feelings of the Christian traveller who visits the spot on the banks of the Loire, where immemorial tradition and an ancient monument mark the place at which the Saint crossed the river on his way to Marmoutier. At about twenty miles from Tours the railway between that city and Angers stops at the station of St. Patrice; the commune is also named after the Saint, and, as we shall see, there is historical evidence that it has been thus designated for at least nine hundred years."

"The first witness whose evidence we shall take on the subject of the Saint's arrival at St. Patrice is one which many believe to have survived since his time, but on this point the reader must form his own opinion. Above the station, on the side of the hill which rises from the banks of the Loire, we find the famous tree which bears 'the flowers of St. Patrice.' For ages past it has been an object of religious veneration with the people of Touraine, and now in our time it is particularly interesting to find that this devotion was shared by that eminent servant of G.o.d, Leon Dupont, the Thaumaturgus of Tours.

Monsignor C. Chevalier, President of the Archaeological Society, has published a very full account of the tree and of the traditions connected with it, the subtance of which we subjoin, together with the result of personal investigations made on the spot in August, 1881. At this season the tree was covered with foliage so luxuriant, from the ground upwards, that it was impossible to distinguish the stem, and in every respect it presented the appearance of a tree in its prime, without a sign of decay. It belongs to the botanical cla.s.s Prunus Spinosa, or blackthorn, and it was covered with berries at the time of our visit. These, however, were the evidence of a second efflorescence in the spring. The celebrity of the tree arises from the fact that every year at Christmas time it is seen covered with flowers, and the tradition at St. Patrice, handed down from father to son, affirms that for fifteen hundred years this phenomenon has been repeated at the same sacred season. It matters not how intense the cold of any particular winter; while the ground beneath and the country around lie covered in their white shroud, the "flowers of St. Patrice" unfold their blossoms and bid defiance to the fierce north winds which sweep the valley of the Loire."

The next witness is the old parish church, dedicated to St. Patrick, which stands about thirty yards from the tree. Its old charters and records show that it dates back from the beginning of the tenth century. One old charter, bearing the date of 1035, contains a deed of gift of some lands adjoining the church of St. Patrick. The church stood on the Roman road between Anjou and Tours. "Thus," concludes Father Bullen Morris, "ancient records and immemorial traditions complete our story, and set St. Patrick on the high road to St. Martin at Marmoutier" ("Ireland and St. Patrick," pp. 35--40).

BRITAIN IN GAUL ST. PATRICK'S NATIVE COUNTRY.

UNLESS it can be proved that there was a province called Britain in Gaul, and another Britain quite distinct from the Island of Britain, it would be useless to argue that St. Patrick was a native of Gaul. The Saint represents himself as a native of Britain; and even Probus, who is credited with believing that St. Patrick was a native of Armoric Gaul, distinctly states that the Saint was born in Britain (natus in Britanniis). It is, however, not difficult to prove that there was a province in Gaul called Britain (Britannia) even before the birth of St. Patrick.

Strabo, in his "Description of Europe," narrates in the Fourth Book that about 220 years before Christ, Publius Cornelius Scipio, the father of Scipio Africa.n.u.s, consulted the Roman deputies at Ma.r.s.eilles about the cities of Gaul named Britannia, Narbonne, and Corbillo.

Sanson identifies Britannia with the present town of Abbeville on the Somme. Dionysius, the author of "Perigesis," who wrote in the early part of the first century, mentions the Britanni as settled on the south of the Rhine, near the coast of Flanders.

Pliny, in his "Natural History," when recounting the various tribes on the coast of Gaul, mentions the Morini and Oramfaci as inhabiting the district of Boulogne, and places the Britanni between the last-named tribe and Amiens. (Pliny, lib. i., cap. x.x.xi.; Carte's "General History of England," vol i., p. 5).

"The Britanni on the Continent extended themselves farther along the coast than when first known to the Romans, and the branch of that tribe mentioned by Dionysius as settled on the coast of Flanders, and the Britons of Picardy mentioned by Pliny, were of the same nation and contiguous to each other. Dionysius further adds that they spread themselves farther south, even to the mouth of the Loire, and to the extremity of Armorica, which several writers say was called Britain long before it came into general use (Carte, p. 6).

"Sulpicius Severus, in his "Sacred Histories," gives an account of the Bishops summoned by the Emperor Constantius in the year 359 to the Council of Ariminium n Italy. Four hundred Bishops from Italy, Africa, Spain, and Gaul answered the summons, and the Emperor gave an order that all the Bishops were to be boarded and lodged, whilst the Council lasted, at the expense of the treasury. Whereupon Sulpicius, writing with pride of the action taken by the Bishops of the three provinces, Gallia, Aquitania, and Britannia, makes use of the following words: "Sed id nostris, id est. Aquitanis, Gallis, et Britannis, idecens visum; repudiatis fiscalibus propries sumptibus vivere maluerunt. Tres autem ex Britannia inopia proprii, publico usi sunt, c.u.m oblatum a ceteris collationem respuissent; sanctius putantes, fesc.u.m gravare, quam singulos" (Lib. ji,, p. 401).

"The proposal seemed shameful to us, Aquitanians, Gauls, and Britons, who, rejecting the offer of help from the treasury, preferred to live at our own expense. Three, however, of the Bishops from Britannia, possessing no means of their own, refused to accept the maintenance offered by their brethren, deeming it a holier thing to burden the treasury than to accept aid from individuals" (Lib. ii., p. 401).

If any doubt exists as to the Britannia referred to, it is solved in the same book, p. 431. Sulpicius Severusi an Aquitanian by birth, speaks of the trial, condemnation and punishment of the Priscillian heretics by the secular Court at Treves in the year 389. Priscialla.n.u.s and his followers, Felicissimus, Armenia.n.u.s, and a woman named Euchrosia were condemned to death and beheaded, but Instantias and Liberia.n.u.s were banished to the Island of Sylena, "quas ultra Britanniarn sita est" (which is situated beyond Britain). Although it is not precisely known where the Island of Sylena was situated, except that it was somewhere beyond Britain, the Britain referred to surely must be Britain in Gaul, for it is incredible that the Gauls should possess a penal settlement in the North of Scotland, where Sylena must have been situated, if the words "beyond Britain" refer to the Island of Britain.

It is evident that if Sulpicius, who was born in 360--thirteen years before St. Patrick--could speak of Armorica as Britannia, and the Armorican Bishops as Britons, when he wrote his "Sacred Histories," it cannot be a matter of surprise that St. Patrick, if born in Armorica at a later period, should speak of himself as a Briton, and say that he had relatives among the Britons.

Armorica was called Britannia by Sulpicius Severus, but Sidonius Apollinarus, who flourished some time after, called the same country Armorica. It was not, however, unusual, as Carte points out, for the same people and the same country to be called by different names; for example, the Armorici and the Morini were one and the same people, whose names had the same signification--dwellers on the sea coast.

(Carte, p. 16; Whitaker's "Genuine History of the Briton," pp. 216-- 219.)

As the historians just quoted are not concerned with the history of St.

Patrick, but are simply tracing the origin and history of the Britons, their testimony is impartial.

Even Camden admits that Dionysius places the Britons on the maritime coast of Gaul, and renders his verses into English:--

"Near the great pillars of the farthest land, The old Iberians, haughty souls, command Along the continent, where northern seas Roll their vast tides, and in cold billows rise: Where British nations in long tracts appear And fair-haired Germans ever famed in war."

The early existence of the Britons in Armorica did not depend on the settlement of the veteran Britons, who, having served under Constantino the Great, were rewarded by a gift of the vacant lands in Armorica, as William of Malmesbury narrates in his "History of the Kings"; or on the still larger settlement of Britons who fought for the usurper Maximus, which Ninius mentions, in the mysterious reference which embraced the whole country "from the Great St. Bernard in Piedmont to Cantavic in Picardy, and from Picardy to the western coast of France." The latter settlement took place between the years 383 and 388. The British refugees, who fled in terror from the Picts, Scots, and Saxons, may indeed have added to the numbers of Britons in Gaul from time immemorial, but they certainly were not the first to give the name Britannia to that country.

BRITANNIAE IN THE PLURAL NOT APPROPRIATED TO GREAT BRITAIN.

IT has been often urged, without any solid reason, that the plural Britannise used for Britain in the "Confession" can only refer to Great Britain, because that country was sub-divided by the Romans into five distinct provinces. The reason given cannot be convincing, because Catullus, who died in the year 54, used the plural for Britain before the Roman sub-divisions were made, when he wrote, "Nunc timent Galliae, timent Britanniae"--Caesar, "the Gauls and the Britons fear." The plural was used by St. Patrick when writing the "Confession" nearly one hundred years after the Romans with their divisions had left the country. It was used by Probus, who undoubtedly referred to Armoric Britain when writing about St. Patrick's native country, for he tells us in the plural that the Saint was born in Britain (natus in Britanniis). The plural was, therefore, used both for Britain in Gaul and for the Island of Britain.

The word Britannia occurs three times in the "Confession." In the "Book of Armagh" the name appears always in the plural, whilst in the Bollandist's copy of the "Confession" the name is printed once in the singular and twice in the plural. St. Jerome uses the singular always when referring to Britannia; and St. Bede, in his "History," uses the plural and singular indiscriminately. Whenever Britannia is mentioned, the context alone can guide us in distinguis.h.i.+ng which Britain is meant. ("Ireland and St. Patrick," by the Rev. Bullen Morris, pp. 24, 25).

St. Patrick also mentions Gaul in the plural ("Gallias"), for although the whole country was subdivided into three separate nationalities--the Gauls, the Aquitanians, and the Britons--as Sulpicius Severus had already mentioned, the three provinces were called Gallise, or the Gauls, by the Romans. Galliae in the plural, therefore, either meant the whole country or any one of its sub-divisions, and the context alone could determine which province was meant.

Having these facts in mind, it is easy to interpret the words of St.

Patrick: "Though I should have wished to leave them, and had been ready and very desirous of going to Britain [Britanniis], as if to my own country and parents; and not that alone, but to go even to Gaul (Gallias) to visit my brethren, and to see the face of the Lord's Saints, and G.o.d knows how ardently I wished it but I was bound in the Spirit, and He Who witnesseth will account me guilty if I do so--and I fear to lose the results of the labour which I have begun. And not I, but the Lord Jesus Christ, Who commanded me to come and remain with them for the rest of my life--if the Lord so will it, and keeps me from every evil way, that I should not sin before Him" ("Confession").

St. Patrick's relatives resided in the Gaulish province of Britain, and the disciples of St. Martin--"the Lord's Saints"--lived at Marmoutier in the province of Gaul. St. Patrick's natural desire was first to visit his relatives in Armorican Britain, and next to renew his friends.h.i.+p with the followers of St. Martin at Marmoutier, but G.o.d had decreed that he should spend all the rest of his days in the land of his adoption.

Gaul was not only the name of the whole country, which embraced three provinces--Gallia, Aquitania, and Britannia--it was also the name of one of the provinces. As Gaul in its widest sense was a different country from the Island of Britain, so the province of Gaul was quite distinct from the province of Armoric Britain. The Gauls, Aquitanians, and Britons, all possessing, as Csesar testifies, separate governments and different nationalities, regarded one another as distinct races.

Thus Sulpicius Severus represents a Gaul as addressing some Aquitanians as follows: "When I think of myself as a Gaul about to address Aquitanians, I fear lest my uncultured speech should offend your too refined ears"--"Sed dum cogito me hominem Gallum inter Aquitanos verba facturum, vereor ne offendat nimium urbanas aures sermo rusticior"

(Dialogue 20).

ST. PATRICK CALLS COROTICUS, A BRITISH PRINCE, "FELLOW CITIZEN."

IT is objected again that St. Patrick called the followers of Coroticus, who were Britons, his fellow citizens, and that, therefore, the Saint and the island Britons are of the same nationality.

The objection is founded on St. Patrick's "Epistle to Coroticus," in which the following words occur: "I have vowed to my G.o.d to teach this people, although I should be despised by them, to whom I have written with my own hand to be given to the soldiers to be forwarded to Coroticus. I do not say to my fellow citizens, nor to the fellow citizens of the pious Romans, but to the fellow citizens of the devil, through their evil deeds and hostile practices."

As the Romans had abandoned Britain long before the letter to Coroticus was written, it is somewhat difficult to understand the precise meaning of the words just quoted: "I do not say to my fellow citizens, or to the fellow citizens of the pious Romans," unless some of the soldiers of Coroticus were, like St. Patrick, Roman freemen. The word "citizen"

in the Roman sense was as wide as the extent of the Roman Empire.

Although the soldiers of Coroticus are also called "fellow citizens of the pious Romans," no one would surely dream of saying that the soldiers of Coroticus and the pious Roman were actually of the same nationality. St. Patrick could, therefore, call the soldiers of Coroticus in the same sense his "fellow citizens," without implying that he was of the same race. If, however, the soldiers of Coroticus were Roman freemen, they would be fellow citizens of St. Patrick and fellow citizens of the Romans, although of different nationalities. The indignant protest made by the Saint in the same letter, that "free-born Christian men are sold and enslaved amongst the wicked, abandoned, and apostate Picts," greatly favours our interpretation of "fellow citizens."

It must, however, be acknowledged that there is a considerable amount of obscurity about the meaning of the words, which are so confidently interpreted as signifying that the Apostle of Ireland was a native of Great Britain. But the words as they stand cannot be fairly a.s.sumed to prove that St. Patrick was a "fellow countryman" of the soldiers of Coroticus, unless they prove with equal force that the Romans were of the same nationality as the soldiers of Coroticus. The quotation proves too much and, therefore, it proves nothing.

SUMMARY.

HAVING given the different theories concerning the native country of St. Patrick, and having faithfully quoted all that the Seven old Latin "Lives" of the Saint have narrated on this subject, and given our reasons for accepting the Armoric theory as the most reasonable solution of the problem, it will be advisable to give a brief summary of the arguments brought forward to prove that St. Patrick was an Armorican Britain, born at Boulogne-sur-Mer.

Boulogne-sur-Mer, or ancient Bononia, was called by the same name, "Bonaven," as the town in which St. Patrick implies that he was born.

Boulogne possessed a Roman encampment, and it was, therefore, Bonaven Taberniae, mentioned in the "Confession."