I've been wondering when anyone would comment that the Irish trace
themselves back to Adam. In the Annals of Innisfallen (the only ones I have
readily to hand) this is done through Míl son of Bile who married Pharoah's
daughter Scotta. When Pharoah drowned chasing the Jews out of Egypt, Míl
and his family left Egypt by way of North Africa and Spain on their way to
conquer Ireland. Míl died on the way, and his sons took Ireland. Míl is
given a genealogy in typical Irish (and Biblical) fashion, that traces him
back to Adam. These events are gridded into Old Testament history, in which
Moses is covered in unusual detail, including his birth and death. This by
implication seems to rank him as one of Ireland's saints since only the
saints get births and deaths recorded until long after Patrick's time.
Thus not only could the Irish produce a lot of parallels for Patrick, as
pointed out by Larry Swain, but the frame of reference for their world-view
demanded that they find these. Furthermore, linking Patrick to Moses was
clever. Patrick was not called the "Apostle to Ireland" before the 11th
century. The original Apostles to Ireland were twelve saints, led by
Finnian and including Columcille and not including Patrick. Since the
ever-mutating hagiographies of the saints evidently held the claims of the
kin groups to territory and jurisdiction (and prestige and status was
vital), this put Patrick's adoptive kin group at a disadvantage. So Moses
was quite an inspired choice - if you already have twelve saints and their
kin groups claiming Apostleship in Ireland, grabbing Moses for Patrick (and
his adoptive kin group) is quite a good trump, don't you think?
Best
Pippin
Pippin Michelli, Ph.D
Assistant Professor of Art History, St Olaf College
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/michelli/index4.html
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|