Talk:Brendan the Navigator

Dates

Is there any objection to "fixing" the commemoration dates listed at the top of the page? I'm an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and we commemorate St. Brendan on May 16, and not in January. Even the Orthodox Wiki [1] has the commemoration Bredan the Navigator [2] as May 16. BLPisani (talk) 13:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Confusion

Is there a reason for confusing the historical Brendan of Clonfert with the "Saint Brendan" of the Navigatio I have material for the Voyage but hesitate to post it and have it mangled. User:Wetman

If they are two different people, they do indeed deserve two different articles. I had understood that the semi-legendary Brendan the Navigator and the historical Brendan of Clonfert were essentially two different bodies of lore relating to the same person. Listing the two as duplicate articles did nothing to dispersuade me of that notion, and I tried to harmonize them while keeping the essential data from both articles here. If I was wrong, everything needs to be reverted. -- Smerdis of Tlön

Have you looked into translations of the Navigatio? The crystal column? the fallen angel-birds... 'Semi-legendary' would have to apply to the Odyssey too then. Or Sir John Mandeville. Or Prester John? But Brendan of Clonfert, canonized after his death-- that's a real person. (BTW, I enjoy your entries and editing User:Wetman

Yes, I have read the Navigatio. Now what I started doing was a basic article merge: you put all the text on one page, and then you go through and cut what's redundant from one to the other. I gather that you'd prefer a different approach, one that treats B of C and StB as two separate though related subjects?

Actually, I suspect that "semi-legendary" is about right about StB and Odysseus. I see no reason to deny that the Trojan War took place, that a leader named Odysseus fought in it, and that he took the long way home. The story got embellished in the re-telling, and that's my take on the Navigatio as well. -- Smerdis of Tlön 14:43, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Islands

There I go again.. After a few "minor" edits by Kenneth, the article now reads like this (after being Faroe islands for a while):

It is possible that Brendan may have encountered the Shetland Islands on his journey, perhaps being their first historical coloniser, as the Orkney Islands were recolonised by Christian missionaries about this time. The Orkneys had been heard of and commonly known to the monks but Shetlands were not, representing the next step outwards from the British Isles. Christopher Columbus may have relied on the legends told of St Brendan as part of his argument that it was indeed possible to travel to Asia by crossing the Atlantic.

This section now makes no sense. Why would Christopher Columbus have relied on these legends if Brendan discovered the Shetland islands? Do we have references in the literature about Brendan that theorize about him ending up on the Shetland islands? If so, I'm for keeping this in the article, but that doesn't change what I'm going to say in the next paragraph.

The section used to talk about the speculations that Brendan ended up i America on his voyages. These speculations are well known and is something an encyclopedia should report. If we want to report more, we should offer arguments for and against. Obviously Kenneth is in the 'against' camp. We should not be changing this to the Shetland islands! Martijn faassen 14:54, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Popular knowledge about traveling capabilities have proven that the Catholic emissaries were just landing upon the Orkneys later by a few decades. I think it highly absurd to postulate that Brendan would have made it to America when there isn't much mention of the Shetlands during his time.

I've actually found some references online (but where? I can't find it anymore) which place him on the Shetlands as *part* of the voyage, but them have him possibly go to the Americas later on. Martijn faassen 16:32, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Columbus fluffed his image to look descended professionally from people like Brendan. It certainly gained him enough money for his voyage. There was no proper understanding of America in those times, from Europe. Lord Kenneð Alansson 16:49, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

At the most, I'd concede he might have hit the Faroes, considering it had been long known as the "Sheep Isles", Norway being Thule. Sheep livestock raising is a key signature of Christian agriculture in the Isles. There had been no traces of European remains in the Americas before vikings. If you would have it that he hit "America", or likely they thought "Atlantis", then this is just too mythological and fantastic. Oh, and he did not record such people as "Skraelings" or ice. Considering their technology, I'd say Atlantis wasn't any further west than the Canary Islands, Azores and I'd laugh if it were said to be Bermuda. Most people do not adhere to the Atlantis story anyways, so why is the notion that he hit America so valid?? Lord Kenneð Alansson 16:04, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

I'm not proposing he hit America. But it's a long standing theory that is talked about by many people. Removing this theory from the encyclopedia page about him would be unencyclopedic. Martijn faassen 16:32, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Well, we can talk about how people have speculated and dreamed of it, but providing it as definite, or the chief source of view doesn't scientifically uphold itself. It is laughable, sort of like the New Age practitioners pretending that they are the same as their ancestors, or that their amendments to include all cultures into their frame of reference for their occult nature when no such understanding of other cultures existed during ancient times. The 60s may have been good to help us analyse and idealise, but trying to change facts to fit those ideals of the present, doesn't work. That's looking at history backwards. Lord Kenneð Alansson 16:49, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

I have lots of opinions about stuff, but all I'm trying to point out in the role of dry encyclopedist is that we should put this view in the article. We can say it is considered unlikely. The voyages after all were recorded hundreds of years after the event. Just by putting in these things in the right order lets people draw their own conclusions. Omitting the America speculation is only making this encyclopedia less valuable. Martijn faassen 18:50, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Distinguishing Biography and Legend and Fiction

If Wikipedia has one entry for the actual Antonio Salieri and the "Salieri" character in Amadeus, one needs two separate subsections to discuss the person and the fictional creation based on the person. There is Alexander the Great and then there is the medieval "Alexander" a legendary figure, one of the "Nine Worthies". Is the actual historical Frederick Barbarossa sleeping in a distant cavern, ready to wake? Must that aspect get discussed in contexts that also includes the granting of urban charters and the politics behind the Crusades? Wetman 15:31, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

I know you have a point, but please define it less atmospherically. Lord Kenneð Alansson 16:04, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

You've been somewhat "atmospheric" about things in the past, Kenneth, so don't call the kettle black. :) I do agree Wetman should come up with a proposal for separating fact from fiction in the article. Martijn faassen 18:50, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

I noticed the first part of this article follows newadvent.com's entry on Brendan almost verbaitem. It sounds as if this is bordering plagiarism. I call for this article to have major editing or some parts of it rewriitten. --BrenDJ 18:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

If it's the same newadvent.com I am thinking of, that would have been taken from the online Catholic Encyclopedia, a source from the early 1900s, and public domain. Many articles copy text from it verbatim; there's a tag {{catholic}} that should be added to articles that reproduce it. Not sure that this text does, but if it does, all that has to be done is to add that bit in, and an appropriate notice will appear. Smerdis of Tlön 19:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Removed from article

I just removed this comment by User:68.127.231.197 from the article page. I'm sure he intended for it to go here.

Speaking of the Canary Islands, aside from the known seven islands, the native people sometimes refer to the Isla de San Borondon, or Island of St. Brendan, as another island of the group. This is not really an island, but a bank of cloud that hangs to the north of Gran Canaria and Teneriffe and is visible during certain times of the year. Aside from the voyage to the Americas, perhaps the voyage to the Islands of Paradise was actually to the Canaries, and this legend is the last trace of this adventure, separate from the one reenacted by Tim Severin to North America, and subsecuently confused with it. 68.127.231.197 04:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC) Robert Waid

--Cuchullain 05:11, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Also rm, text about "Brendan Joseph Dale" - poss hoax (see here[3][4][5][6][7]), nn vanity etc etc. --SigPig 11:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no consensus for move. Joelito (talk) 17:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• Brendan → Saint Brendan — Saint Brendan article should not accupy the generic name article (Brendan could be the disambig article) — Talk:Brendan — CobaltBlueTony 13:39, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support, because Smerdis has a good point, but as per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), we should use the most common name for the title, and that's "Saint Brendan" in this case, not "Brendan" (or "Brendan of Clonfort").--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. See comments below. Smerdis of Tlön 14:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC) Vote noted here by CobaltBlueTony 19:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• Also note the existence of Saint Brendan's, a liqueur. "Saint Brendan" is more ambiguous than Brendan of Clonfort. Smerdis of Tlön 19:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose — Smerdis has made a good case that this Brendan is the major use of the name unadorned (the others have other names). — Gareth Hughes 21:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose - Even as a saint, I've primarily seen him referred to as "Brendan the Voyager", or "Brendan of Clonfort" in texts with a more formal tone. Indeed, I generally have only seen him referred to as "Saint" in religious texts, such as "Lives of the Saints" and on a Mass card I saw once. --SigPig 03:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

I've requested this page be moved to Saint Brendan here because there are other Brendans that may have equal weight in the mind of users, and the Saint may not even be on their minds at all. The disambig gives too much weight to this usage of the name. - CobaltBlueTony 13:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• I currently oppose moving the page. We do have a Brendan (disambiguation); the Brendans disambiguated there all have last names, or are fictional characters. WP:NAMEPEOPLE suggests that titles like "saint" should only be used if they are the most effective way of disambiguating people; see also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Western clergy). St Brendan is the only Brendan who is just Brendan at the disambiguation page. I don't see that a move is strictly necessary, but if it is moved, it should be to Brendan of Clonfort, not Saint Brendan. Smerdis of Tlön 14:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Pop culture section

What are people's feelings on deleting this article's Pop Culture section? They tend to get loaded up with every single mention in any movie, song or video game, no matter how trivial. I'm for deleting it all unless there is an outcry. Mlouns 16:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Delete it, and incoporate anything useful into the main article (if there is anything).--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Last call -- this section may get deleted very soon. Mlouns 01:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC) I'm in favour of keeping it. I found it useful in preparing a lecture about St.Brendan. Nennius 1/1/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.141.243 (talk) 11:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Inscriptions in North America

Despite the discussion at the top of this page (dated 2004). this section was removed. you could accuse it of plagiarism, but not of original research. Its referenced. the quotes used are straight from Pat Coogan's book. I restored the section ClemMcGann (talk) 23:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Alas! removed again; it seems that some editors do not recognise this talk page. ClemMcGann (talk) 14:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Dante inspired by legend?

In Dante's PURGATORIO, Purgatory and the Garden of Eden are located on an island that can only be reached by a long sea journey. Has there been any discussion of whether Dante read the St. Brendan legend and decided to use a few details? CharlesTheBold (talk) 04:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Dante may have read the Navigatio (it was certainly widely disseminated in Latin and there was a 14th century Tuscan version), but the positioning of Eden and Purgatory on islands could have been derived from any number of sources. Many medieval descriptions of Eden dating from before and after the Navigatio locate it on an island and the same goes for Purgatory and assorted manifestations of the infernal regions. I don't think anyone has looked into the legend's possible influence on Dante in a concerted way, possibly because it's so hard to make firm connections. It is a very intriguing issue though. ANB (talk) 15:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Brendan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130619060640/http://www.allsaintsbrookline.org:80/celtic_saints/brendan.html to http://allsaintsbrookline.org/celtic_saints/brendan.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:07, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Brendan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://saint-brendan.org/history.asp.
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131115062328/http://www.dioceseofkerry.ie/page/heritage/saints/st_brendan/ to http://dioceseofkerry.ie/page/heritage/saints/st_brendan/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081221033421/http://www.lamp.ac.uk/celtic/bblismore.htm to http://www.lamp.ac.uk/celtic/bblismore.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013152250/http://forteantimes.com/features/articles/262/the_voyage_of_beyond_the_sea.html to http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/262/the_voyage_of_beyond_the_sea.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070319060926/http://www.faroestamps.fo/?side=b6d3d096d981070acabd94f279a86586 to http://www.faroestamps.fo/?side=b6d3d096d981070acabd94f279a86586

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:55, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

==Wiki Education assignment: FYSEM-UA 900 Busting 11 myths about the archaeology of human evolution== This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 January 2022 and 13 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nioumad (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Zionnalof.

Requested move 16 November 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Per consensus, and also to move dab to base title. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

---

Brendan → Brendan the Navigator – It seems obvious to me that "Brendan" should redirect to Brendan (given name) rather than this page. I would move boldly, but as there has been previous discussion, policy suggests I put in a request. The choice of Brendan the Navigator is dictated by a Google NGrams search on Brendan of Clonfert, Brendan the Navigator, and Brendan the Voyager. But if people prefer Brendan of Clonfert as the article lead currently has it, that also would be fine with me. OsFish (talk) 08:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

• Agree I agree with this move as this Brendan is almost never refered to by his name alone (almost always either Saint Brendan or Brendan the Navigator). FishandChipper 🐟🍟 11:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom and move Brendan (given name) to Brendan. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:31, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

  Brendan (given name) should stay that way (as with every other given name page) and Brendan (this page) should redirect to Brendan (disambiguation) FishandChipper 🐟🍟 11:40, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

  Brendan (given name) should stay that way (as with every other given name page)... I think you need to take a look at Category:Given names if you think that! What else is there on the disambiguation page of any notability whatsoever (given the saint is mentioned on the given name page)? -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:50, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

  Well I meant for ambigious names (like this one). Obviously names that are ONLY first names don't need the additional suffix. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 17:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom (no clear primary topic) but move the DISAMBIGUATION page (Brendan (disambiguation)) to the basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 15:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
  • Support this.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support Paintspot's arrangement. And "Brendan the Navigator" is the right target. StAnselm (talk) 19:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support per above arguments. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:50, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
• Comment as nom The reason I propopsed that Brendan redirect to Brendan (given name) is that a) I strongly suspect the majority of people putting simply "Brendan" into the search box are after the given name (thus reducing the number of user clicks to target, as per policy) and b) in agreement with FishandChipper's argument above, Brendan isn't sufficiently unambiguously a first name to take over the basic title. I think the (given name) title helps the user understand which page they've landed on. OsFish (talk) 12:33, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
  • It is not usual for a basename to redirect to a disambiguated article of the same name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:08, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
    • WP:PRECISE like Energy rather than Energy (physics) and Warsaw not Warsaw, Poland. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support would be fine with either the DAB or the given name at the base name, the DAB may be better as there are other uses the the company. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:04, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. Pageviews suggest that people are not looking to wind up at the given name or dab pages. Best left alone. Srnec (talk) 21:41, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

  I think you're forgetting that the average person doesn't really know their way around Wikipedia. If someone looks up "Brendan Wikipedia" its much more likely they are searching for the name Brendan rather than the Saint Brendan. The average person will come across this article and probably think there's nothing more to find on Brendan the name. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 11:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

  If that's how they operate, then they don't know how to use Google either and are not our problem. In reality, I suspect the "average person" HATES landing on dab pages and name pages. There is just no evidence that many readers are looking to sift through lists of Brendans. At least compared to the numbers that are plainly interested in learning about this Brendan. Srnec (talk) 14:11, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support "Brendan the Navigator", clear and to the point. Don't know why it was moved in the first place. Manannan67 (talk) 22:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

  I don't see any record that it was ever moved. It has been at this title since 2003 so far as I can tell. Srnec (talk) 01:49, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

  See Brendan the Navigator redirect 23 March 2007‎. (Maybe the redirect should have gone the other way.) Manannan67 (talk) 07:29, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support, not even because of nom, but that "Brendan the Navigator" is without question the common name for this saint.

Xx78900 (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.