Professor Zimmer’s theory that Palladius and Patrick were one and the same person (a theory which had been already maintained by Schoell and Loofs[397]) is at variance with the distinct tradition, and does not account for the change of name.[398] It is based upon a paragraph which was added, probably by the Armagh scribe Ferdomnach, to his copy of Tírechán (Rolls ed. p. 333), where it is stated that Palladius was also called Patricius. It is also stated that Palladius suffered martyrdom among the Scots, _ut tradunt sancti antiqui_. This is at variance with W and _V. Trip._ which state that he died of disease. Muirchu says simply “died.” The same notice says that Patrick was sent by Celestine. This paragraph cannot carry any weight; it is not supported by the earlier sources. But why, we must ask, should any one have invented the assertion that Palladius was also called Patricius? The answer seems to be that the two dates for Patrick’s death, the true 461 and the false 493, led, in the eighth century, to the belief in a second Patricius. This phantom is called “the other Patrick” in one of the interpolated stanzas in the hymn _Genair Patraicc_; and he came to be distinguished as _senex Patricius_ (_Ann. Ult._ and _Chron. Scot._ 457) or _Sen Patraicc_ (_Calendar of Oengus_, August 24).[399] One attempt to give this fictitious personage a reality may have been to identify him with Palladius.[400] Many wild and worthless speculations have been founded on this duplication of Patrick (see, for instance, Shearman’s chapter on the “History of the Three Patricks” in _Loc. Patr._ pp. 395 _sqq._; Olden, _Church of Ireland_, Appendix A, and the article on Patrick in the _Dictionary of National Biography_, which is vitiated by the Sen Patraicc delusion). Another attempt to place the second Patrick was to connect him with Glastonbury, and thus account for the mediaeval Glastonbury tradition that the true Patrick was an abbot of that monastery (so Ussher, followed by Petrie, _Tara Hill_, p. 73).[401] But there is no evidence that the Glastonbury story has any foundation or is older than the tenth century. It is to be observed that the date August 24, given in martyrologies as the day of Old Patrick, cannot be alleged as an argument for his existence. In the _Mart. of Tallaght_ (ed. Kelly), p. xxxii, we find two Patricks under this date: Patricii Abb. ocus Ep. Ruisdela. Patricii hostiarii ocus Abb. Airdmacha. It is clear that there was an obscure but historical Patrick, abbot of Rosdela (near Durrow), whose day was August 24; and that his name was the motive for placing “Old Patrick” here. Compare the glosses in the _Calendar of Oengus_.[402] Armagh also wanted to appropriate “Old Patrick,” and so he appears in some of the lists of its abbots. 8. _Patrick’s Alleged Visit (or Interrupted Journey) to Rome in A.D. 432_