The king-lists of Gwent and Glywysing part 1

The pedigree tables below shows the lists relevant for the reconstruction of the pedigrees of the royals of Gwent and Glywysing. Note, the generation numbers increase from top to bottom.  It is proposed that the names in square brackets have been lost in the surviving manuscripts whereas those in round brackets are corruptions that should be ignored. The names appear as in the respective manuscripts except for those in square brackets which are given in their equivalent modern form as are those that appear in the accompanying text.

Gen. Date range MP 3b seg. Harl. 4181b seg. JC 9 GM 1b HG 29 HG 28
-8 211×242 Meirchion Meirchion
-7 243×275 Mevric Meurig
-6 276×307 Krierwy Karairyw Enenni Caradawc vreichvras
-5 308×340 [Meurig] Meuric Meuric Meuric
-4 341×372 Edric Edric Erbic Erbic
-3 373×405 [Cadivor] Cadivor [Cadivor]
-2 406×437 Vrban Urban Erb
-1 438×470 Nynniaw Kynaw Nynnyaw
0 471×502 (Teithvallt) [Llywarch] (Teithvael) [Llywarch] Llywarch
1 503×535 Tewdric St. Tewdrig Thewdric Tewdrig Teudubric
2 536×567 Mevric Meurig Meuric Meyrig [Meurig]
3 568×600 Adros Ad[r]os Adroes Adroes Atroys
4 601×632 Morgan Morgan Morgant Morgan Morcant Morcant
5 633×665 Einvdd Enyth [Ei]Nud (hael) (Haddhail) [Einudd] (Iudhail) [Einudd] [Einudd]
6 666×697 Rys Rhys Rees Rys Ris Iudhail
7 698×730 [Brochwel] [Brochwel] Brochuael [Brochwel] [Brochwel] Fernmail
8 731×762 [Gwriad] [Gwriad] Gwryat [Gwriad] [Gwriad] Atroys
9 763×795 Arthvael [Arthfael] Ar[th]uael [Arthfael] Artmail [I]udhail
10 796×827 Mevric Meurig Rees Meyrig Mouric
11 828×860 Brochuael Brochwel Howel Brochuail [B]rocmail
12 861×892 Eweint
13 893×925 Morgant

Table 1

Gen. Date range MP 3a seg. Harl. 4181a GM 1a
7 698×730 Brochuael Brochwel Brochuail
8 731×762 Gwraidd (Edwin Vryth) Gwriad Gyriat
9 763×795 Arthavael Arthmael Arthuayl
10 796×827 Rys Rhys Rys
11 828×860 Howel Howel Howel
12 861×892 Owain Owain Ywain
13 893×925 Morgan (mwynvawr) [Hen] Morgan (Mwynfawr) [Hen]

Table 2

JC 9 claimns the husband of Enynny was called Caradog Freichfras. However, this is a corrupted transcription from an earlier document of Creirwy, or its abbreviation.

The name Einudd of gen. 5 takes the form Ainydd in Mostyn 212b (not shown). In JC 9 it has become corrupted to Nud Hael. In HG 29 the name Einudd was replaced by Ithel. This error was due to the fact that both Ithel and his father Einudd had sons called Rhys, see table 3. This lead to Einudd disappearing altogether in HG 28 and 29 and to the belief that Ithel was the son of Morgan.

Bartrum noted that ‘Ris’ of HG 29 was the ‘Rees’ of JC 9. He also took the ‘Artmail’ of HG 29 to be the ‘Arthuael map Gwryat’ of JC 9. His original conclusion that the names Gwriad and Brochwel had been lost in HG 29 was correct.

To understand why Brochwel and Gwriad disappeared from HG 29 one needs to look at MP 3 which the compilers incorrectly thought was one line of descent whereas it needs to be considered as two, namely MP 3a and 3b as shown in the tables 2 and 1 respectively. The Brochwel, father of Gwriad, of gen. 7 in MP 3a was assumed to be the Brochwel ap Meurig of gen. 11 in MP 3b. So, when the two lists were incorrectly joined into a single sequence, MP 3, Brochwel ap Rhys and his son, Gwriad, were removed as those names were assumed to be corrupt repetitions. In Harl. 4181 even Brochwel’s grandson, Arthfael, was seen as an incorrect repetition and removed from the combined list, see table 1. In Harl. 4181a Gwriad actually appears but in the corrupted form Edwin Vryth.

As mentioned earlier, the name Einudd became altered to Ithel. Chronology suggests that the Ffernfael ab Ithel who died in 775, according to the Annales Cambriae, was the son of Einudd.

The lists result in the tree diagram below:


Table 3 The date associated with each generation number is the mid-value of its generation range.