197 



"This expression" is said to be "another proof that the period, when 

 Patrick wrote, was before the foundation of the kingdom of the Franks 

 under Pharamond in 420, at which time the Franks had estabUshed 

 their dominion in Gaul."* It would, however, be quite enough to 

 shew that this passage only points to a time while the Franks con- 

 tinued pagans, which they were till the close of the fifth century, when 

 Clovis and his followers became Christians, and his zeal rendered the 

 continuance of such traffic impracticable ; but the above inference can 

 be equally rebutted, for the kingdom of the Franks was not established 

 in the person of Pharamond but in that of Clovis, and not in 420 but 

 in 481. The 8th objection is, " because the Roman writers call many 

 men Patrick, who, while living, never bore the name ;"!- and the last ap- 

 pears to be that, which ledLedwich to doubt his existence altogether, — 

 because the lives written of him, as well as the Annals of the Four 

 Masters, ascribe to him what are termed gross fabrications. These sha- 

 dows certainly require no exorcism, yet such is the reasoning by 

 which it is sought to shew, " that Patrick, the genuine apostle of Ire- 

 land, flourished ages before the fifth century."^. The opinion would 

 be such a dislocation of Irish history, that we could not be excused 

 from combating it. 



The reader is already in possession of the long received history of 

 Saint Patrick, and the authorities on which it is founded, to which 

 might be added abundant evidences from the native annals of the 

 country ; but this is neither allowable nor necessary to adduce here. 

 Whether and when other Patricks may have existed, there are fixed 

 principles by which the age of this can be easily adjusted. It must 

 have been, (according to those who have written while the tradition 



* Researches, p. 279. f Researches, p. 245. 



J Researches, p. 305. 



