Saint Patrick & Names along the Antonine wall

[MonsGraupius]

This week "well "M" . . .

Does this mean, 'This weak "Welsh" "M" . . .'?

There's evidence for Welsh-like language(s) being present all the way up the west coast of Britain from Cornwall, to Cumbria and Strathclyde.

We are told that Ninian preached to the Southern Picts from Whithorn, which could mean the language was "Pictish", but we have so little solid information about Pictish specifically that it's very difficult to tell the language group let alone whether it was a form of Welsh.

However, there is also later Gaelic overlay, because Medio becomes "Bal-muildy" where "Bal" appears to be Gaelic for "Settlement of". Then you have the possibility of Germanic, from Roman Auxiliaries, Norse invaders, Northumbrians. So the linguistics in this area of complex and there appear to have been several changes any of which could bring about a change in the way place names were pronounced. I wouldn't therefore say "they spoke XXX therefore ....this explains YYY"

What we do know, is that today we have two spellings of the same word: "DuMbarton" in "West DuNbartonshire". Thus even if we can't be sure of the exact linguistic history, we do know that this "M" (or N) isn't strongly fixed to one spelling and indeed it is completely absent in the Roman form of Dobiadon.

Dum- type place names abound in areas where there's evidence for early Welsh-like language, so it's not unreasonable to think that Dumbarton came from a Welsh-like language. The two variant spelling of dauu and dam meaning "related to" show that in Welsh there is also this "weak M" in this element. Thus this "weak M" is a plausible explanation from the dropped "M".

[Renatus]

So, am I right, after all that?

[MonsGraupius]

So, am I right, after all that?

I've tried to explain the complexity of the issue, which means it isn't possible to be as black and white as you suggest.

Also, it's not a general "Welsh has a weak M", but instead within these words in this position the M appears to be weak. That may be because of the specific linguistic changes in this area and nothing to do with Welsh, but the evidence showing that Welsh has two variant spelling within this Do(m) type word does indicate that it's intrinsic to Welsh in some way.

But I'm definitely not making a general statement about Welsh as spoken in modern Wales.

[Renatus]

I think you miss my point. I was simply pointing out what I thought was a typo.

Moving on, if you contend that the list of forts continues north of the Clyde estuary, do you have candidates for Litana, Cibra and Credigone?

[MonsGraupius]

I think you miss my point. I was simply pointing out what I thought was a typo.

Moving on, if you contend that the list of forts continues north of the Clyde estuary, do you have candidates for Litana, Cibra and Credigone?

A Week Oops! Belated thanks.

candidates for Litana, Cibra and Credigone?
In the article I suggest linguistic similarities between

• LiTana = LinDum
  
• CibRa = CoRia
  
• cREdIGONE = RErIGONI>um
  

However, these are very poor matches and what's more the Ptolemy map is a complete mess in this area. And the result is it isn't really possible to know which "coast" any of these places are near let alone if they once may have formed a "line" on a map which may or may not be based on Ptolemy.

Strategically, given the modern ferry crossings that are found along the coast going to Dunoon, Rothsay, Arran, along the coast as far as Ayr, the Antonine defences would need to have included military sites all the way along this coast.

So, there are three possible interpretations.
1) that the line ended at Greenock and was very much a "line",
2) that it ended further south so that the "line" curved at the end.
3) that someone mistakenly copied extra entries to the list (which is a very easy thing to have happened if you've ever seen ancient texts).

The other way to look at it is, to see what Roman settlements are on the Clyde. There may be ones west of Dumbarton, but that doesn't make sense to me. And the main indication of Roman activity is on the South of the Clyde estuary. I've studied the Antonine wall in detail (and even walked the entire length). However, I haven't studied the southern side of the Clyde estuary in the same detail, mainly because the coastal strip where you might expect settlement has been massively changed by industrialisation and before (when the Clyde was not navigable by big boat up to ~Glasgow) was a hive of early activity.

So, the main Roman remains are to be found on the hills above this settlement zone such as the fortlet at https://canmore.org.uk/site/41342/lurg-moor this hints at a larger settlements somewhere else along the shore but I've no idea where or how many. But a couple of Roman coins were found near Greenock.

I would show you all the Roman material, but unfortunately, CANMORE which lists sites in Scotland doesn't have an explicit "Roman" category, so instead you get a list of Roman sites + Roman Catholic churches. But there is a list of Roman Forts (which unhelpfully doesn't show any west of Dumbarton - which wrongly suggests there is nothing Roman there):

https://canmore.org.uk/site/search/resul...1&view=map

[Nathan Ross]

the early works on Saint Patrick telling us he was born in the area of Strathclyde.

How many early works mention that he came from Strathclyde? I can only find one - a 10th-century gloss of the 8th-century hymn of Fiacc, explaining the name Nemthur as Alt Clud, which is in that country.

Christians with Roman names may have come to Strathclyde to escape the various persecutions against the Christians.

What persecutions? And why would they have fled to Strathclyde?

the Gaelic hymn of Fiacc records Nemthur as the birthplace of Saint Patrick and because it was recorded close to the relevant period

But the Confessio, apparently written by Patrick himself, says he came from uico Bannauem taberniae, or Bannaventa burniae, or Bonavem tabernia, or something... So either this unknown place is the same as 'Nemthur' (or 'nem Thur'), or Patrick is lying about his origins, or he forgot where was from... Or 'nem thur' is not his place of origin.

if we accept a variant reading of an inscription at found Mumrills fort, this inscription confirms Mumrills was VOLITANIO

Which inscription is this? I didn't know there was any inscriptional evidence for these place names on the Antonine Wall.

[MonsGraupius]

the early works on Saint Patrick telling us he was born in the area of Strathclyde.

How many early works mention that he came from Strathclyde? I can only find one - a 10th-century gloss of the 8th-century hymn of Fiacc, explaining the name Nemthur as Alt Clud, which is in that country.

As I quote in the article: "However there is compelling evidence to locate his birthplace in Strathclyde. For example Turner (1890) says:

“four of the five perfect lives explicitly state that Saint Patrick was born in Britain; three of them add, in the district of Strathclyde! It is hard to imagine how any one could be so audacious as to reject such a weight of ancient testimonies,"

But even if there is one saying he was born in Strathclyde, there is none saying he was born elsewhere.

Also Thomas (p.310) tells us that any traces of Patrick's activities are "decidedly northern". However, there are also theories that there were "two Patricks" - one northern (Patrick) and one southern

(from another article) Perhaps some of the problem is that Murphy (1942) suggests that there were two Patricks. If so this may explain why it has been so hard to agree on a single birthplace. Murphy suggests that the first (probably the same as Palladius) came to Ireland around 431 and “made the Barbarous island Christian” and died 457. The second Patrick (and key one for this proposal) continued his predecessor's work in Connacht and:

broke wholly new ground in Ulster, journeying "to outlying regions beyond which no man dwelt, and where never had anyone come to baptize, or ordain clergy, or confirm the people " (Confession, 51 quoted by Murphy P.298)

Christians with Roman names may have come to Strathclyde to escape the various persecutions against the Christians.

What persecutions? And why would they have fled to Strathclyde?

The Antonine wall was a former area of Roman colonisation. The Coin evidence shows links with Rome throughout the empire.
And Strathclyde was also likely a "client state". If you read the various accounts, there is a suggestion that there was some form of agreement that if "they" (presumably people south of Antonine wall) were attacked by Caledonians, that they would receive aid to combat them.

The coin evidence and former wall suggest links with Rome - and if as I suggest it was a "Roman are tolerated" area - it would be a place that those wishing to leave the Roman empire would go to.

As for which persecutions. We are told that St.Alban was "traditionally believed to have been beheaded in the Roman city of Verulamium (modern St Albans) sometime during the 3rd or 4th century, and his cult has been celebrated there since ancient times." I think if I were a Christian living in St.Albans at that period I would be considering moving elsewhere.

the Gaelic hymn of Fiacc records Nemthur as the birthplace of Saint Patrick and because it was recorded close to the relevant period

But the Confessio, apparently written by Patrick himself, says he came from uico Bannauem taberniae, or Bannaventa burniae, or Bonavem tabernia, or something... So either this unknown place is the same as 'Nemthur' (or 'nem Thur'), or Patrick is lying about his origins, or he forgot where was from... Or 'nem thur' is not his place of origin.

No, it says his Grandfather lived there. It doesn't say he was born there.

(From Howlett: "Confessions of Saint patrick" )
"...had a father a certain man called Calpornius, a deacon, son of Potitus, a Presbyter, who was in the town of Bannaventa Berniae, for he had a little villa nearby, where I conceded capture. In years I was then almost sixteen".

if we accept a variant reading of an inscription at found Mumrills fort, this inscription confirms Mumrills was VOLITANIO

Which inscription is this? I didn't know there was any inscriptional evidence for these place names on the Antonine Wall.

To quote the article (roman-britain.co.uk/nemthur.htm)

HERCVLI MAGVSAN SACRVM VAL NIGRINVS DVPLI ALAE TVNGRORVM (RIB 2140)

Translating these Roman inscriptions is a bit of an art form as they do not have punctuation and tend to shorten words, sometime abbreviating whole words to one letter. The key to understanding the importance of this inscription is the word "VAL" which is usually thought to be an abbreviation of a name Valerius. This gives the usual translation:

"To holy Hercules Magusan, Valerius Nigrinus, Duplicarius of the [First] Tungrian Wing [dedicates this]."

But, like so many inscriptions there are other, equally valid ways to read this. VAL is usually paired with the following name NIGRINVS to give a name, but another interpretation is that VAL is a name in its own right in the genitive. If so, it goes with the preceding text: HERCVLI MAGVSAN SACRVM VAL and would be translated as: “To holy Hercules Magusan, of VAL...”. As we suspect Mumrills was the VOLITANIO of the Ravenna Cosmography, this inscription can also be read as:

"To holy Hercules Magusan of Volitanio, Nigrinus Duplicarius of the [First] Tungrian Wing [dedicates this]."

I accept it's not perfect - however I've not seen anyone who doesn't suggest Mumrills is Volitanio. So even if you dispute the reading, this name allocation seems to be generally accepted.

[Nathan Ross]

The Antonine wall was a former area of Roman colonisation.

Was it, though? I don't know of any Roman coloniae north of Hadrian's Wall. A few of the Antonine Wall forts had vici - Castlecary did, I think - but they were only occupied for a short period of time in the 2nd century. Coin evidence tells us only that the Romans had trade links with the area.

it would be a place that those wishing to leave the Roman empire would go to... I think if I were a Christian living in St.Albans at that period I would be considering moving elsewhere.

Albanus was a military martyr, executed for refusing his military oath iirc, and if he existed at all he probably died under Severus. Crucially, he is the only known Roman martyr from Britain - and there are very few from northern Gaul either. The various persecutions of the 2nd and 3rd centuries were not enforced to any degree in Britain or the west: Constantius Chlorus was believed to be sympathetic to Christians anyway, and only took the mildest steps against them in AD303-304 (removing the doors of churches, for example).

So I suggest there would be no reason for any Christians in the west to flee from imperial persecution, and certainly not for them to cross the frontier into barbarian country (however 'friendly' the barbarians!).

"...in the town of Bannaventa Berniae, for he had a little villa nearby, where I conceded capture..."

The 'little villa' (villula) is quite telling too - wherever this Bannauem place was, it had to have (in the early-mid 5th century) not only an established Christian clergy, with priests and deacons, and civic structure, with decurions, but also to be sufficiently settled as to support small villa estates (evidence for which is almost nonexistent in the far north). I really don't think the Romanised fringe around Strathclyde would have boasted such things.

All this points towards a settled, secure and Romanised district - precisely the sort of place Irish sea raiders would have wanted to plunder, of course!

I've not seen anyone who doesn't suggest Mumrills is Volitanio.

It seems to me that you're doing two different things with this subject. On the one hand, engaging in the old antiquarian quest for names of places mentioned in ancient sources - which seems fairly uncontroversial, although without direct evidence it's always going to be guesswork - and on the other hand the old antiquarian quest for St Patrick's birthplace. Using one hypothetical answer to support another hypothetical answer might make for a neat 'solution', but the whole thing remains entirely... hypothetical.

[MonsGraupius]

The Antonine wall was a former area of Roman colonisation.

Was it, though? I don't know of any Roman coloniae north of Hadrian's Wall. A few of the Antonine Wall forts had vici - Castlecary did, I think - but they were only occupied for a short period of time in the 2nd century. Coin evidence tells us only that the Romans had trade links with the area.

By "Colonised" I using it colloquially as in "settled", but it is worth nothing that two place names hint at Roman colonies: Colonia and Colanica

The Antonine was first colonised in the Time of Agricola, then by Antonine, Severus was also there. These however are the campaigns we know about so there could be others. The coin evidence around Glasgow doesn't show a spike in the 2nd century and then nothing after as you might expect if the area were only Romanised for a short time, but instead the coins show a continuance throughout the Roman period, and indeed there are more later coins. Then you have many coin hoards from the time of Severus like Bernia in Moray and the Traprain law hoard (with Christian icons) and the picture is one of continual contact.  

it would be a place that those wishing to leave the Roman empire would go to... I think if I were a Christian living in St.Albans at that period I would be considering moving elsewhere.

Albanus was a military martyr, executed for refusing his military oath iirc, and if he existed at all he probably died under Severus. Crucially, he is the only known Roman martyr from Britain - and there are very few from northern Gaul either. The various persecutions of the 2nd and 3rd centuries were not enforced to any degree in Britain or the west: Constantius Chlorus was believed to be sympathetic to Christians anyway, and only took the mildest steps against them in AD303-304 (removing the doors of churches, for example).

So I suggest there would be no reason for any Christians in the west to flee from imperial persecution, and certainly not for them to cross the frontier into barbarian country (however 'friendly' the barbarians!).

St. Alban is traditionally believed to have been beheaded in the Roman city of Verulamium (modern St Albans). He is believed to be the martyr referred to in the c396 Victricius's De Laude Sanctorum (The Praise of Saints), who, "in the hands of the executioners told rivers to draw back, lest he should be delayed in his haste." Saint Patrick's grandfather, Potitus, was a priest. The Irish annals date Patrick's arrival in Ireland at 432 when he was 16. His father, Calpurnius, must have been born in the 4th century making his grandfather a young man at the time that St. Alban is likely to have been martyred. In his grandfather's position, as a priest, would you stay around to suffer a similar fate? But, the Roman empire stretched from Africa to Scotland, so where could you go in Britain, except north toward Strathclyde or perhaps to Ireland?

"...in the town of Bannaventa Berniae, for he had a little villa nearby, where I conceded capture..."

The 'little villa' (villula) is quite telling too - wherever this Bannauem place was, it had to have (in the early-mid 5th century) not only an established Christian clergy, with priests and deacons, and civic structure, with decurions, but also to be sufficiently settled as to support small villa estates (evidence for which is almost nonexistent in the far north). I really don't think the Romanised fringe around Strathclyde would have boasted such things.

All this points towards a settled, secure and Romanised district - precisely the sort of place Irish sea raiders would have wanted to plunder, of course!

And what is the Latin word for a typical iron age estate?

Unless you have proof for the Romans using another word to refer to native estates, you really have to accept that they could & would use Latin words in a Latin text to refer to places that were not Roman. So you cannot argue the use of Latin word in a Latin text necessarily means that what is being referred to COULD ONLY BE Roman.

To give an obvious example: some now use the word "Farmstead" to refer to Iron-age farms. Does this mean they called them "Farmsteads" and spoke English? Or is it conceivable that they might have been called something very different, and that we use one of the available words in our language to refer to something that we know almost certainly was referred to by a different word?

I've not seen anyone who doesn't suggest Mumrills is Volitanio.

It seems to me that you're doing two different things with this subject. On the one hand, engaging in the old antiquarian quest for names of places mentioned in ancient sources - which seems fairly uncontroversial, although without direct evidence it's always going to be guesswork - and on the other hand the old antiquarian quest for St Patrick's birthplace. Using one hypothetical answer to support another hypothetical answer might make for a neat 'solution', but the whole thing remains entirely... hypothetical.

Nothing you have put forward has shown me to be wrong in any point. Whilst I might accept your point about "Antiquarians", if I were suggesting one name on its own, the three successive names of:

(6)Medio=Bal-muildy,
(7)Nemeton=Nemthus=Old Kilpatrick=The Seventh & last fort on the Antonine wall and
(8)Dumbarton = Sub-dobiadon,

is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to occur by mere chance - which is what you are really saying.

In contrast what is the evidence for all the absurd suggestions of St. Patrick's Birthplace which are given CONTRARY the evidence he was born in Strathclyde? It's that - after you've totally changed around what is written - that ONE PLACE out of SEVERAL HUNDRED sounds similar, despite the fact there is NOTHING ELSE to connect with St. Patrick. If that isn't just cherry picking a chance coincidence then what is?

We are told that Patrick was born in Strathclyde. We are told he was born at Nemthur. Nemthur matches Nemeton at Old Kilpatrick. The two names (before and after) also fit. If that is not a compelling argument for assigning the names, then I don't know what would count.

[Nathan Ross]

In his grandfather's position, as a priest, would you stay around to suffer a similar fate? But, the Roman empire stretched from Africa to Scotland, so where could you go in Britain, except north toward Strathclyde or perhaps to Ireland?

There was no 'similar fate'.

St Alban is unknown before the AD390s - a decade when all sorts of martyrs were being invented and promoted - and his story does not fit any known episode of persecution in Britain. The persecution ordered  by Diocletian in AD303 was never enforced in Britain, which was under the control of Constantius Chlorus.

So there would be no reason for the (very few) Christians in Britain at the time to flee anywhere. Even in places where the persecution was enforced most severely, we do not hear of Christians fleeing to seek shelter with barbarians outside the empire.

Nothing you have put forward has shown me to be wrong in any point. 

Nor would it - except in the case of the persecutions (for which we have historical evidence) nothing you are discussing could be proved either right or wrong, without some new evidence to support it.

It may well be that Patrick was from Strathclyde (although the 10th-century scholiast just says that 'nem Thur' was Altcluid). It could be that the names on the Antonine Wall were as you suggest; there's nothing to say they were not. But I do not think any of this is 'compelling evidence', as you suggest, or that it 'securely assigns' the meanings you are putting forward.

[MonsGraupius]

In his grandfather's position, as a priest, would you stay around to suffer a similar fate? But, the Roman empire stretched from Africa to Scotland, so where could you go in Britain, except north toward Strathclyde or perhaps to Ireland?

There was no 'similar fate'.

St Alban probably did not exist (he is unknown before the AD390s - a decade when all sorts of martyrs were being invented and promoted - and his story does not fit any known episode of persecution in Britain). The persecution ordered  by Diocletian in AD303 was never enforced in Britain, which was under the control of Constantius Chlorus.

So there would be no reason for the (very few) Christians in Britain at the time to flee anywhere. Even in places where the persecution was enforced most severely, we do not hear of Christians fleeing to seek shelter with barbarians outside the empire.

There is plenty of evidence for Christians in Britain in the form of Chi Rho symbols and similar found on all manner of artefacts and beheading was a typical form of execution used by Romans. Surely if you were making up a saint, you'd have picked some better form or martyrdom than the typical execution of the Romans?

Nothing you have put forward has shown me to be wrong in any point. 

Nor would it - except in the case of the persecutions (for which we have historical evidence) nothing you are discussing could be proved either right or wrong, without some new evidence to support it.

It may well be that Patrick was from Strathclyde (although the 10th-century scholiast just says that 'nem Thur' was Altcluid). It could be that the names on the Antonine Wall were as you suggest; there's nothing to say they were not. But I do not think any of this is 'compelling evidence', as you suggest, or that it 'securely assigns' the meanings you are putting forward.

First, St.Alban is not the only Martyr. I will quote:

Bede (Caps 6-8) tells us that during the Diocletian persecutions c303AD, that there were martyred in Britain Stephen and Argulius, both bishops of London; Socrates, Bishop of York; Amphibalus, bishop of Llanduff; Nicholas, Bishop of Penrhyn; Melior, bishop of Carlisle; St.Albans; Julius and Aaron priest in Caerleon; and over 889 communicants in different grades of society" (Martyrology of Nother, 894AD; Haddan and Stubs, Vol. 1, P. 32; Gildas 516-570AD, De Excidio Brittaniae, Hist. VIII, Section 10,10). The terrors of this persecution in Britain were recorded by friend and foe. Constantius, of Lyons, who wrote the life of Germanicus Poitiers, 500AD, and Venantius Fortunatus, Bishop of Poitiers 530-609AD, both of the friendly Gallican Church, and the Venerable Bede, of the hostile Saxon on (673-735AD), alike tell the story of St.Alban, Amphibalus, Aaron and Julius.

I suggest it is you that is being misled. The British church was established long before St. Augustine came to Canterbury in 597AD as the multitude of early Christian artefacts & known parsonalities show. Indeed, even the British mother of emperor Constantine who made Christianity official c312AD is said by Sozomen's Historia Ecclesiastica, to have picked up her Christianity in Britain. Whether this is true or not, is debatable, but whether it could be is not. Because there is ample evidence for early Christianity.

Indeed, far from overstating the amount of Christianity in Britain, the evidence is that the Catholic church has been telling the opposite story: that they started Christianity here with Augustine in 597AD and for good reason as this was a reason why the British church would be subject to Rome. That is total nonsense! So, rather than overstating the case for those like St.Alban, as you suggest, it if far more likely you are restating "pro-Rome" propaganda downplaying the importance of the early church in Britain. Until relatively late, and despite Augustine, Britain had an independent church which was not founded by Rome - and therefore Rome had no jurisdiction over Britain (which as you might guess was not appreciated there).

The Alternatives To Old kilpatrick

You've made a lot of criticism of Old Kilpatrick, so please do tell me what you think of the other suggestions such as that Saint Patrick was born in Northamptonshire?

Let's review the case?

Does any ancient source say he was born in England? No
Does Northamptonshire have any early connection with Saint Patrick? No.
Is Northamptonshire a likely place to be raided by Pirate? Certainly Not! (Middle of the country)
Does it have a chance name similarity with the place of his birth (Nemthur)? No!
Does it have a chance name similarity with his Grandfather's home? Yes (but only after it is mangled).
Is there any other compelling reason to pick this place? No!

Score 1/500 (around 500 place names - several of which have similar likenesses)
In other words, this idea of Northamptonshire is just that out of 500 Roman names, this one is similar. It could be any other place, it just happened to be there (or a couple other with less similar names)

What about Old Kilpatrick:
Does any ancient source say he was born in ? Yes (They mention near Dumbarton Rock)
Does Old Kilpatrick have any early connection with Saint Patrick? Yes (The name)
Is Old Kilpatrick a likely place to be raided by Pirate? Yes! (It's on the sea)
Does it have a chance name similarity with the place of his birth (Nemthur)? Yes! (Nemeton)
Does it have a chance name similarity with his Grandfather's home? Yes. (Bannatia is given on Ptolemy as being close)
Is there any other compelling reason to pick this place?
1. Two other name matches at Medio (Balmuildy) and Sub-Dobiadon (Dumbarton)
2. It is a place where Christians would flee - being "Romanised" but not "Roman".
3. We are told the references to Saint Patrick as "Decidedly northern"

Score 6/6 (The name at one place: Old Kilpatrick matches Nemthur)

Devil's Advocate

So, Let's just assume that those asserting that St.Patrick was born in England were right? (despite the texts saying he was born in Strathclyde)

How does that affect the argument?
1. Medio still matches Bal-Muildy
2. Sub-Dobiadon still matches Dumbarton
3. Nemeton still matches Dal-notyr
(Note: hyphens added to help highlight similarities).

Likewise, even if Dumbarton or Balmuidy were totally different - we still have good matches in other places.

Thus the argument does not stand or fall on any one element. Instead each element both stands on its own but also adds to the likelihood that the others are correct.

It is overwhelmingly compelling.

[Nathan Ross]

I suggest it is you that is being misled. The British church was established long before St. Augustine came to Canterbury in 597AD as the multitude of early Christian artefacts & known parsonalities show. Indeed, even the British mother of emperor Constantine who made Christianity official c312AD is said by Sozomen's Historia Ecclesiastica, to have picked up her Christianity in Britain... there is ample evidence for early Christianity... it if far more likely you are restating "pro-Rome" propaganda downplaying the importance of the early church in Britain.

There's plenty of evidence (archeological and literary) for early Christianity in Britain in the 4th century, but we really don't need to rely on spurious and unlikely saints' lives composed centuries later, nor pious myths about the mother of Constantine and conspiracy theories about the Catholic church!

Tertullian mentions Christians in Britain c.AD200, but the earliest real evidence for Christianity in the province is the appearance of three British bishops at the Synod of Arles in AD314 - they probably represented London, York and Lincoln. So the faith had already attracted devotees by the early Constantinian period at least. Constantine did not make Christianity 'official', of course - that would be Theodosius. No contemporary source mentions persecution in Britain, or any martyrs being killed there (and they were pretty beady-eyed about their martyrs!)

Christian iconography only starts appearing in noticeable form in Britain from the later 4th century - slightly later than in continental Europe - and it's only by the end of the 4th century that we see major expressions of the faith like the 'house church' at Lullingstone (perhaps more likely an audience chamber for the villa's patronus) or the smaller items in the Mildenhall hoard.

You've made a lot of criticism of Old Kilpatrick

I haven't really. I just don't think it a very likely place for several generations of Roman Christians to find themselves in the early 5th century!

And since there is no actual evidence to say that Patrick was from there - your Fiacc scholiast, or Probus, specifically names 'nem thur' as Alt Clud, which as far as I know is Dumbarton, not Old Kilpatrick - it seems at best a vague sort of guess. People have been doing this sort of thing for centuries (and some of them suggesting Kilpatrick too!) without coming up with anything conclusive.

Similarly, the game of pinning place names from ancient sources onto unnamed sites can be fun for a while, but it has diminishing returns I'd say. Or perhaps I just lack imagination?


EDIT - here's the stone with the inscription from near Mumrills. I wouldn't say there's much chance of that VAL being a VOL, or of being anything but the first part of Valerius. The name comes after the word 'sacrum':

ALTAR DEDICATED TO HERCULES MAGUSANUS

[MonsGraupius]

There's plenty of evidence (archeological and literary) for early Christianity in Britain in the 4th century, but we really don't need to rely on spurious and unlikely saints' lives composed centuries later, nor pious myths about the mother of Constantine and conspiracy theories about the Catholic church!
...
No contemporary source mentions persecution in Britain, or any martyrs being killed there (and they were pretty beady-eyed about their martyrs!)

You've made a lot of criticism of Old Kilpatrick

I haven't really. I just don't think it a very likely place for several generations of Roman Christians to find themselves in the early 5th century!

And since there is no actual evidence to say that Patrick was from there - your Fiacc scholiast, or Probus, specifically names 'nem thur' as Alt Clud, which as far as I know is Dumbarton, not Old Kilpatrick - it seems at best a vague sort of guess. People have been doing this sort of thing for centuries (and some of them suggesting Kilpatrick too!) without coming up with anything conclusive.

Similarly, the game of pinning place names from ancient sources onto unnamed sites can be fun for a while, but it has diminishing returns I'd say. Or perhaps I just lack imagination?

Point taken re Constantine not making it "official" - although i don't think there is any doubt he was "officially" a Christian.

It isn't a "conspiracy" that Britain was distinct, Bede say "The Britons are contrary to the whole Roman world, and the enemies of Roman customs, not only in their mass, but in their tonsure." This clearly shows that Briton had customs that derived from another source other than Rome. It's therefore very likely that the early church in Britain was downplayed by the Roman church when they eventually seized control.

On the martyrs

Bede gives us:

CHAPTER VI: "This persecution was the tenth since the reign of Nero, and was more lasting and bloody than all the others before it; for it was carried on incessantly for the space of ten years, with burning of churches, outlawing of innocent persons, and the slaughter of martyrs. At length, it reached Britain also, and many persons, with the constancy of martyrs, died in the confession of their faith."

CHAPTER VII AT that time suffered St. Alban, of whom the priest Fortunatus, in the Praise of Virgins, where he makes mention of the blessed martyrs that came to the Lord from all parts of the world, says ­  In Britain's isle was holy Alban born. <snip> The blessed Alban suffered death on the twenty­ second day of June, near the city of Verulam, which is now by the English nation called Verlamacestir, or Varlingacestir, where afterwards, when peaceable Christian times were restored, a church of wonderful workmanship, and suitable to his martyrdom, was erected. In which place, there ceases not to this day the cure of sick persons, and the frequent working of wonders.
At the same time suffered Aaron and Julius, citizens of Chester, and many more of both sexes in several places; who, when they had endured sundry torments, and their limbs had been torn after an unheard­ of manner, yielded their souls up, to enjoy in the heavenly city a reward for the sufferings which they had passed through.

Bede clearly thought there were persecutions against the Christians in Britain. Whether this was every Christian, or just a few high profile ones does not matter as Saint Patrick's grandfather was a priest and would have been one of the high profile people likely to be executed unless he gave up. The dates for St, Patrick and St. Alban also are remarkably good. So saying Pontius may have left as a result of St.Alban's martyrdom is very credible

Re: "Similarly, the game of pinning place names from ancient sources onto unnamed sites can be fun for a while, but it has diminishing returns I'd say. Or perhaps I just lack imagination?"

So don't look because you don't think anything will be found, which is a self-fulfilling prophecy - as you won't find anything unless you look.

But I did look and I found the name of Old Kilpatrick. Which proves you wrong!!

However, I do agree with you that, there have been people who have gone around assigning names to places based on nothing more than a guess. So unless you have specific information to tie a name to a place, at best that allocation should be called "tentative".

But this is not what we have with Old Kilpatrick. This is a run of good links, linked together because they are in a list, with clear historical evidence for "Nemthur" being at Dumbarton or (3.75miles east to ) Old Kilpatrick. That's no distance (it's the distance from Tower of London to London Zoo!). So, I'm sorry your statement saying that Alt Clud is too far from Old Kilpatrick is just rubbish.

[Nathan Ross]

Bede clearly thought there were persecutions against the Christians in Britain.

Of course he did - by his day, every self-respecting churchman needed a list of martyrs from right on his doorstep!

But Bede was living in the 8th century. The persecutions were in the early 4th century. Would Christians living at the time not have a better idea what was going on that a man living four hundred years later?

"Constantius... lest he should have seemed to dissent from the injunctions of his superiors, permitted the demolition of churches - mere walls, and capable of being built up again - but he preserved entire that true temple of God, which is the human body". (Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors, XV)

"[Constantius] ... took not the smallest part in the war against us [i.e. the persecutions], but preserved the pious that were under him unharmed and unabused." (Eusebius, Church History, VII.13)

"Constantius alone, following a course of conduct different from that pursued by his colleagues, entered into the friendship of the Supreme God...They polluted their provinces by the indiscriminate slaughter of godly men and woman; but he kept his soul free from the stain of this crime... and secured to his subjects the privilege of celebrating without hindrance the worship of God." (Eusebius, Vita Constantini, 13)

So no Christians in Britain were martyred, or even molested in the slightest, under the 'Great Persecution', whatever later generations might have believed.

There is no reason to imagine that any Christians were forced to flee to the distant north, or anywhere else.

Any ructions that crept in later between the churches of Britain and Rome were post-Roman developments, and would have been in their infancy at best in Patrick's youth.

your statement saying that Alt Clud is too far from Old Kilpatrick is just rubbish.

I wasn't too bothered about the distance. But your scholiast says that 'Nemthur' was Alt Clud. Alt Clud was supposedly Dumbarton. And Dumbarton, you are saying, was the RC's Subdobiadon.

If Nemthur/Alt Clud/ Subdobiadon are the same place, they cannot also be the same place as Old Kirkpatrick, aka Medio/Nemeton. So Patrick cannot have come from Old Kilpatrick... and the similarity of names is just coincidence.

But perhaps he did come from there after all. On the other hand, the connections could be faulty at any point, and just like Bede and his British martyrs the whole thing could be based on not much!


EDIT - I was just pondering this:

Saint Patrick's grandfather was a priest... So saying Pontius may have left as a result of St.Alban's martyrdom is very credible

If Patrick was 16 in 432, he must have been born in 416. So his father (giving an average generational gap of 30 years) would have been born c.386. His grandfather Potitius would therefore have been born c.356. His unnamed great-grandfather would have been born c.326, and his great-great-grandfather might have been born c.296, and could have been seven years old at the time of the Great Persecution. So Patrick's great-great-great-grandfather might have been 37 at the time of the persecution. This just goes to illustrate what a very long time we are talking about here!

[MonsGraupius]

Bede clearly thought there were persecutions against the Christians in Britain.

Of course he did - by his day, every self-respecting churchman needed a list of martyrs from right on his doorstep!

But Bede was living in the 8th century. The persecutions were in the early 4th century. Would Christians living at the time not have a better idea what was going on that a man living four hundred years later?

"Constantius... lest he should have seemed to dissent from the injunctions of his superiors, permitted the demolition of churches - mere walls, and capable of being built up again - but he preserved entire that true temple of God, which is the human body". (Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors, XV)

"[Constantius] ... took not the smallest part in the war against us [i.e. the persecutions], but preserved the pious that were under him unharmed and unabused." (Eusebius, Church History, VII.13)

"Constantius alone, following a course of conduct different from that pursued by his colleagues, entered into the friendship of the Supreme God...They polluted their provinces by the indiscriminate slaughter of godly men and woman; but he kept his soul free from the stain of this crime... and secured to his subjects the privilege of celebrating without hindrance the worship of God." (Eusebius, Vita Constantini, 13)

So no Christians in Britain were martyred, or even molested in the slightest, under the 'Great Persecution', whatever later generations might have believed.

There is no reason to imagine that any Christians were forced to flee to the distant north, or anywhere else.

Any ructions that crept in later between the churches of Britain and Rome were post-Roman developments, and would have been in their infancy at best in Patrick's youth.

your statement saying that Alt Clud is too far from Old Kilpatrick is just rubbish.

That is nonsense. Bede was an Anglo Saxon from the Roman church. Why would he have any concern whatsoever to manufacture BRITISH martyrs for the BIRITISH church when he complains bitterly about the way they refuse to adhere to the Roman rites.
"The Britons still persist in their errors, halting and turning aside from the true path, expose their head without a crown and keep the feast of Christ apart fromthe fellowship of the Church of Christ (Bede bk V, C 22-23)

Your whole argument is that Bede is manufacturing martyrs from a group to which he is deeply hostile. That's a frankly ridiculous argument. He is far more likely to be downplaying their martyrs than manufacturing new ones.

I wasn't too bothered about the distance. But your scholiast says that 'Nemthur' was Alt Clud. Alt Clud was supposedly Dumbarton. And Dumbarton, you are saying, was the RC's Subdobiadon.

If Nemthur/Alt Clud/ Subdobiadon are the same place, they cannot also be the same place as Old Kirkpatrick, aka Medio/Nemeton. So Patrick cannot have come from Old Kilpatrick... and the similarity of names is just coincidence.

But perhaps he did come from there after all. On the other hand, the connections could be faulty at any point, and just like Bede and his British martyrs the whole thing could be based on not much!

Dumbarton Rock is visible from the River at Old Kilpatrick. Dumbarton rock is an extremely well known landmark - why wouldn't they refer to this well known landmark - which we still recognise today - and not to a little known settlement?