338 Proceedings of the lloi/al Irish Academy. 



But this section of the List must now be serutiuized from a somewhat 

 diffeieut poiut of view. The Annals of Ulster give a choice of three dates 

 for-the death of St. Patrick, 462, 492, and 493.i Professor Bury prefers the 

 earliest of the three, 462, and he rightly claims that tlie note (L) under no. 1 

 supports his view. It states that 58 years elapsed between the coming of 

 the saint into Ireland and his death.- Interpreting his coming into Ireland 

 as referring to his captivity (c. 404), this gives the date of his death as c. 462.' 

 The date is confirmed by the period of office assigned to him in Y, fifteen 

 years. Reckoning from the foundation of Armagli in 445, this gives 460 as 

 the year of his death. Possibly xu is a scribe's error for xuii, which would 

 bring us to 462. Now let us turn to llie Annals. The Annals of Ulster 

 describe Sechnall (no. 2) as a bishop, but they do not call him bishop of 

 Armagh. They give no title of otHce to Sen-Patraic (no. 3). On the other 

 hand, they describe Beudn (no. 4) iis '• episcopus successor Patricii " and 

 larlaithe (no. 5) as " tertins episcopus Ard Machai," no doubt reckoning 

 St. Patrick as the first bishop. Thus it is clear that they do not regard 

 Sechnall aud Sen-P6traic as coarbs of the founder. According to them, 



thia Senach ' may be Senach Garbh.' (3) The Martyrology of Tallaglit (Bouk of Leiuster, 

 Facs. :{62, col. 4), under Sept. It), has 'Senach Garbh,' while Gorman (followed l)y the 

 Martyrology of Donegal) ha-s Senach, glo»«cd 'son of IJuide.' Stokes identilies this 

 person with a Scnncli Garbh, abbot of Cloufert, who died in 021 (Al') ; no doubt riijlitly, 

 as may be inferred fmm the gloas in IlAwliasou MIA- on Feb. 21 (Oengiis, ed. Stokes,- 

 p. 79): 



Finntan Corach, Senach Garbh, friendly Colmdn son of Cougall, 



A trio of them with valorous warfare, one after the other in the abbacy. 



The abbacy seems to be that of Clonfert : see glosses in Oongus (p. 77) and Gorniiin on 

 Feb. 21. 



These throe are clearly ditTerent persons ; and (.3) cannot be the Senach of the List, 

 while neither of the others is described in the Calendars as abbot uf Armagh. The note 

 in the List seems to conflate the three into one, heli>ed perhaps by a confusion between 

 Cluain Ferta and Cluain hili meic Gricci. The Donegal martyrologist apparently con- 

 fuses (2) with (3). It should be observed that the Annals do not give the Senach of the 

 List the epithet Oarbh. 



This is perhaps a suitable place to remind ourselves of certain characteristics of the 

 Book of Leinstcr. The scribe used excellent material, and he wrote a good hand ; but 

 unfortunately ho is often inaccurate in reproducing his documents. The seeming 

 blunders in this note which we have discussed may not all be due to the scribe of the 

 exemplar which he transcribed. 



Stokes {Onrman, index) thinks one Senoir, son of Mael dd Lna, primate of Armagh, 

 commemorated on April 11, was probably the Senach of the List, but gives no reason for 

 his opinion. 



' See nos. 1, 0. 



' The same statement occurs in the Chronological Poem of Gilla Coemain, 'M ; but 

 there the period runs from St. Patrick's coming as a missionary (Stokes, Tripartite Life, 

 ii p. .537). 



' J. B. Bury, Life of St. Pairiek, p. 383 f. 



