contemporary rhetorical and poetical evidence, from A.D. 408 to 416,
and, therefore, it might be argued, Gaul suits the narrative of St.
Patrick in his "Confession." He and his companions reached land three
days (_post triduum_) after they left the coast of Ireland, so that our
choice lies between Britain and Gaul. The data do not suit Britain. We
cannot imagine what inland part of Britain they could have wished to
reach which would necessitate a journey of twenty-eight days _per
desertum_. Suppose the crew disembarked on the south coast of Britain,
and that the southern regions had been recently ravaged by the Saxons,
yet a journey of a few days would have brought them to Londinium, or
any other place they could have desired to reach from a south port.
Moreover, if they had landed in Britain, Patrick, when he once escaped
from their company, could have reached his home in a few days, whereas
he did not return for a few years. His own words exclude Britain.
Having mentioned his final escape from the traders, he proceeds:
"iterum post paucos annos in Britanniis eram cum parentibus meis." I
believe that "post paucos annos" has been interpreted by some in this
sense: "a few years after my capture." But this is an unnatural
explanation. The words naturally refer to what immediately precedes,
namely, his escape. The only thing that can be alleged in favour of
Britain is the intimation in the dream that he would "quickly come to
his native land" (_cito iturus ad patriam tuam_). "This, of course,"
continues the Professor, "represented his expectations at the time of
his escape. But the very fact that he fails to say that the promise was
literally fulfilled, and glides over the intervening years in silence,
strongly suggests that his expectation was not realised" (Appendix C,
pp. 339--340).

Professor Bury, being a Protestant, treats the Divine admonition given
to the Saint as a dream; not as the voice of God speaking to His