[305] See Bury, _Tírechán’s Memoir of St. Patrick_, p. 16; but I did not see then that the source was probably Irish. [306] Tírechán, 330₁₅₋₁₉: Muirchu, 276₁₁₋₁₄, and 300₁₀₋₁₃: Bury, _ib._ p. 14. [307] “The Tradition of Muirchu’s Text,” in _Hermathena_, xxviii. pp. 199 _sqq._ [308] On account of the notice of Auxilius (of Killossy) and Iserninus (of Kilcullen). It seems very probable that the notice of Iserninus in the _Liber Arm._ (f. 18) may have been derived from information furnished by Bishop Aed on the occasion of his visit to Armagh. See above p. 253. [309] In the Table of Contents to Book II. this is the title of the first and the last section alike; but the last item in the table was wrongly taken to be a heading of sect. 1 (though there are no other headings to the sections), until the true explanation was pointed out by Dr. Gwynn. [310] _Ann. Ult. s.a._ [311] This is the conjecture of Zimmer, _Celtic Church_, p. 81. [312] These parts were first published by Rev. E. Hogan, _Anal. Boll._ vol. i. I have had the advantage of using a photograph of the MS., kindly given me by Dr. Gwynn. [313] See also Todd, _St. Patrick_, 489; Stokes, Intr. to _Tripartite_, cxi. _sq._; Bernard and Atkinson, _Liber Hymnorum_, ii. 175-6. [314] Criticised by Thurneysen, _Revue celtique_, 6, 326 _sqq._, who rejects the theory of interpolation except in the case of stanza 17. So too Stokes and Strachan. [315] The stanzas which are abnormal, or defective, in metre, assonance, etc., are—2, 7, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 33 (for criticisms on their subject-matter see Atkinson, _ib._ xliii. _sqq._). Stanza 16 has a “glossatorial” character (_ib._ xlviii.). The ejection of 10 on ground of subject-matter may be confirmed by the abnormal endings (_nua_ and _tua_, cp. Atkinson, xlii.). 18 (rejected by Zimmer and Atkinson) is clearly an imitation of 18, and this is indicated by the repetition of the rhymes. The rejection of 19 and 20 depends on the subject-matter, and 21 repeats 19. The irrelevance of 22 is obvious. I leave the second stanza as doubtful, for though there is a metrical anomaly (_daec_ a disyllable), there is no objection on the ground of the subject-matter; but it could be dispensed with. [316] Cp. Muirchu, 296₁₂. [317] See Bury, _Guardian_, Nov. 27, 1901, p. 1647. [318] There is no other edition. [319] I have shown, from misunderstandings in V₄ that its author was ignorant of Irish, while the author of V₂ was an Irishman (_op. cit._ 197). [320] Dr. W. Levison of Bonn kindly called my attention to a _Vita_ preserved at St. Omer which proves to be a copy of the _Vita Secunda_ different from that used by Colgan. It is contained in Cod. 716 (_Legendarium beatae Mariae de Claromarisco_), a book of the thirteenth century, vol. ii. ff. 155-9. For the text of _Vita Quarta_, the Stowe MS. 105A (Brit. Mus.) is important (see my _Tradition_, etc., p. 186 _note_).