Merfyn Frych ap Gwriad - Wife of Merfyn Frych: proposed change

I'm with Wolcott. She should be removed, with Nest verch Cynan ap Brochwel added with question marks.

British medieval genealogy always poses serious scholarship challenges to the Serious Genealogist intent in pushing their Family Tree as accurately as possible back further into that period.

Wales is a particularly difficult area to progress medieval genealogy, as it necessarily adds a an understanding of ethnology and historic toponymy to the usual research skills, while also denying the profusion of primary or near contemporary sources that a researcher can access for this period in either England or Ireland. Of course sometimes Welsh affairs briefly appear in Anglo Saxon or Irish chronicles.

However your research is only as good as your skills and workmanship. Wiki Articles that have not been verified are never a reliable source as any college professor will instantly tell you. In some cases these articles amount to another source of 'Alternative Truth'!

Real research will consume your time and your patience. However it will result in your own honest product and your own personal satisfaction. This deeper research also allows you to get to 'walk' in the historic literary footsteps of your own people.

You might begin your literary journey using Charles Cawley's wonderful The Foundation for Medieval Genealogy (FMG), covering Wales at:-

http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/WALES.htm#_Toc389126140

As you see the amount of scholarship employed on that site is considerable.
So let's look at the present problem of history and parentage.

Merfyn the Freckle Faced, king of Gwynedd, or if you prefer Merfyn Frych ap Gwriad, had by Nest of Powys, a son Rhodri, or again as you wish, Rhodri ap Merfyn.

The question raised is who is this Nest of Powys?

Well, her name describes her geographical origin, the Kingdom of Powys, an area of variable extent depending on the warrior skills of each succeeding king.

http://thehistoryofwales.typepad.com/t/7.html

http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsBritain/CymruPowys.htm

Now let us to return to her parentage.

On MedLands we find:-

Cadell of Derrnllwg, the son of Brochwel Ysgithrog, or in Welsh Cadell ap Brochwel had two children.

His son Cyngen ap Cadell, who would reign in turn and later die in Rome.

His daughter, Nest ferch Cadell we have met above.

http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/WALES.htm#_Toc389126140

This conclusively places Nest as daughter of Cadell on the authority no less of the Jesus College Cambridge Manuscript 20, and the existence of her father is vouched for by the Gwentian Chronicle.

Maund (2000), pp. 39 and 150, citing Jesus College MS 20, Bartrum (1966), p. 46, available at available at The Celtic Literature Collection,

<http://www.maryjones.us/ctexts/jesus20gen.html&gt; (16 Feb 2010).

Conclusively?
Well, perhaps, recall these events occurred in the early 800's!

Of course we do have the example of those eminent historians who had described Homer's Iliad and Virgil's Aeneid as beautiful literature and certainly not history until Heinrich Schliemann actually found Troy using those poems as guides!!

So perhaps the literary sources are in fact more reliable than modern pedigrees joining us to them. After all these are 32 or so ggp's, and that remoteness allows a lot of room for fosterage or 'parental uncertainty' in the intervening line.

Notice MedLands actually raises three issues regarding reliability:-

1. Uncertainty of the chronology. Because Mss sources are limited cross-checking to establish chronology is reduced.

2. It is possible that both Ethyll and Nest not historical figures at all but were invented to legitimise claims to Gwynedd and Powys, respectively, in the eyes of successor generations of kings and their supporters.

3. The marriage of Nest of Powys is recorded in manuscripts dated no earlier than the later 14th century, although possibly copied from earlier texts.

And to these you might add concubinage that regularly obscures matrilineal descent in both Welsh and British-Scandinavian society of that time. The Sexual Revolution certainly preceded the 1960's!

Darrell Wolcott too has collected a library of sources relating to the history and genealogy of Wales, see The Center for the Study of Ancient Wales

http://www.ancientwalesstudies.org/.
http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artgue/guestdarrell.htm

So, is Nest of Powys a historical person?

On the balance of those manuscript sources that have survived, but more especially relying on the importance of Epic Poetry and Genealogy to the Irish, Scottish and Welsh Celtic people I certainly believe that Nest was a real person.

There are certainly no primary sources to indicate otherwise.

And if you want to get to grips with just one of the original sources you can sample some of the literature of Wales free at:-

https://ia801404.us.archive.org/0/items/brutytywysogiono00cara_0/br...

Michael

I agree with Mr. Dixon.

Michael George Dixon -- Thank you! It's lovely when people get involved in the Welsh tree.

You are quite right about MedLands -- it has some limitations, but we use it regularly in the Geni tree.

But it actually backs up what Wolcott is arguing. The entire entry for Nest verch Cadell is in square brackets, meaning that she is "doubtful or speculative," as the MedLands use guide puts it.

So they aren't of use in this particular issue, except insofar as they give more credence to Wolcott's argument that Nest verch Cadell (as connected to Merfyn) did not exist.

And they also back his point, which is that there is no manuscript evidence for Nest before the late 14th century.

You've mentioned Jesus College MS 20 -- as does Wolcott -- it dates from the late 14th century (this being the manuscript mentioned above); and also the Gwentian Chronicle -- but the Gwentian Chronicle, which was first published in the 18th century, is a problematic text, on account of having been published by a known forger of antiquities. (MedLands makes this clear.)

I'm not clear on exactly which Epic Poetry you mean -- can you be more specific?

At any rate.

Your conclusion is that "there are certainly no primary sources to indicate otherwise." But I'm not seeing any primary sources to indicate that she did exist -- she is "doubtful or speculative," as MedLands puts it.

**********
Thank you for the lovely link to John Williams ab Ithel's 1860 version of the Brut Y Tywysgoin! I love it, for the dual language set up, and in honor of Williams himself, who was, I think, a fine example of a 19thC antiquarian. He did a great deal of work in the field. His work, however -- this particular edition included -- is no longer considered authoritative, mostly due to his transcription methods; our methods have changed greatly. (Before I retired, much of my own scholarship was in medieval transcription; I feel for him, really, I do. Very headache inducing work.)

This particular edition of the Brut is from Jesus College MS 111 (also called the Red Book of Hergest -- it contains also one of the versions of the Mabinogion) -- which isn't surprising, really, since that's where Williams took his degree.

Skene published an edition of the Red Book of Hergest in 1868, but it also, by current scholarly standards, is flawed.

Many other pieces of the Red Book have been more recently transcribed and translated, but not this piece, as far as I can tell. Darn.

Oxford is digitizing many of its holdings, including this one (though that will do not good to the English readers): http://www.rhyddiaithganoloesol.caerdydd.ac.uk/en/tei-header.php?ms...

Hi Anne

Let us explore the possibilities posed by "The entire entry for Nest verch Cadell is in square brackets, meaning that she is doubtful or speculative", the subject of our discussion.

We are immediately driven towards the two alternatives posed by MedLands:-

It is possible that both Ethyll and Nest not historical figures at all but were invented to legitimise claims to Gwynedd and Powys, respectively, in the eyes of successor generations of kings and their supporters.
Or
The marriage of Nest of Powys is recorded in manuscripts dated no earlier than the later 14th century, although possibly copied from earlier texts.

Consider the first, legitimizing the political claim to Gwynedd and Powys.
Factually Powys ceased to exist as a kingdom in 1069.
http://www.coflein.gov.uk/en/site/405112/details/mechain-possible-s...
http://darrell75657.tripod.com/centerforthestudyofancientwales/id14...

While the kingdom of Gwynedd survived longer ending either with the death of King Llywelyn ap Gruffydd ap Llywelyn in 1282.
His daughter Gwenllian, the Last of the Bloodline, was packed off to a convent where she spent the rest of her days.
http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsBritain/CymruGwynedd.htm

My diversion into this history is to demonstrate that Ethyll and Nest both ceased to have any political relevance to any political claims between 1069 and 1282, ergo they must have had a relevance in their own right, they must have existed!

Now, let's turn our attention to the second exception, "The marriage of Nest of Powys is recorded in manuscripts dated no earlier than the later 14th century, although possibly copied from earlier texts."

This is a rather bizarre exception! Because the very nature of manuscripts requires transcription for survival. Every medieval monastery contained a Scriptorium, producing new works, new copies of old works for new foundations, or simply new copies to replace worn copies.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13635a.htm

The real exception of course is that Jesus College Cambridge Manuscript 20 survived the wrath of the Iconoclasts who systematically destroyed contents, fittings and fabric of so many monasteries in Tudor Britain & Ireland. Later of course, during the War of the Three Kingdoms, the new Parliamentary Fundamentalists often destroyed whatever art and documents had otherwise escaped. We see similar Iconoclasm happening even today in the Middle East!

So Anne, this leaves us with only two theories concerning events that may have occurred 1200 years or so ago, Nest existed or Nest did not exist!

And on reflection, given the length of time intervening, that is still a rather tidy outcome!

We are, to some extent, indulging ourselves in a modern although academic discussion of how many angels might dance on the head of a pin!

My reference to Epic Poetry only notices any mss contents can considerably predate the actual writing of the mss itself. Therefore the 'age' of even an 'original' mss cannot be assumed to reflect or indeed measure of the antiquity of contents.

Michael

I've read thru most of this now, and expect to do some more reading before it's over. It seems to me the meat of it is nicely summarized by Cawley at MedLands:

"It is impossible to judge which version is preferable."

Very polite and academic, but what it means is that if you're choosing, you're not doing it for rational reasons ;)

Nest could be Merfyn's wife, or she could be his mother, or she could be fictional. It doesn't get any muddier than that.

Our ancestors did not see history in the same we do. These old mss. are full of tidbits from later times that are essentially just propaganda. If should have happened like that, so let's concretize it like this. You know you've hit one of those points when the sources begin to differ about basic facts.

This is one of those. The point is to claim a descent from this line for Merfyn's descendants, not to record historical detail.

I don't see why we would go out of way to enshrine something on Geni that can't be decided firmly by experts working in real life. Cut the line and be done with it.

Michael George Dixon -- Nobody is making anybody dance on pins. this is not actually an indulgent academic exercise. It's pretty straightforward, actually.

Here is a precis of the discussion so far:

First, I propose that Next verch Cadell should be removed from her connection to Merfyn Frych. This is based on the fact that early MSS do not mention her; she shows up in genealogies no earlier than the end of the 14th C; and that this later addition of her to the line appears to be part of the larger project of enlarging the legend of Rhodri Mawr, Merfyn's son.

Michael rebuts this as follows:

1) We should consult MedLands, which is a very good authority. --- We did. MedLands says that Nest is "doubtful or speculative."

2) That Jesus College MS 20 says that she exists. -- Yes it does, but it is the exact "late 14th C MS" where we already said she first shows up.

3) That the Gwentian Chronicles back this up -- Yes, they do, but they were published in the 18th C by a known forger.

4) That Nest had no political claims to anything, so must have existed. -- True, by the time she shows up in the Jesus College MS Powys is no longer of importance, but this is not only a jump in logic, but ignores the earlier argument, which was that she was being invented later to aggrandize Rhodri Mawr.

5) That the fact that she doesn't show up until the late 14th C is irrelevant, since MSS were commonly copied, and do not all survive, and therefore there could have been earlier copies. -- We all know that of course MSS were copied, and that they didn't all survive, but although it was a regular practice for 19th C academics to speculate -- and then state as fact -- things that might have been in lost manuscripts, we no longer do that. AND even if we DID, there ARE earlier MSS, and she isn't in them.

I think I got that all.

What I now think is the best course of action is to leave her where she is, but label the profile "Fictional," and add in the information concerning the problem.

I enjoy Wolcott's finding of a later Nest verch Cadell who might have married Merfyn Frych, but it's actually speculative, and I don't think it's a good idea to add her. I think she, too, can get discussed in the Overview, with a link to Wolcott's discussion.

Hi Anne and all,
Anne, I agree with the conclusions you have made here. Please do as you wish on this one. I just lost my son two weeks ago to a massive heart attack, so I am not able to wrap my head around this at this time. Please feel free to take curator-ship of this one if you would like. Thanks, Myrna

Something to consider about marking her Fictional is that in similar cases we've done some minimal re-arranging to make sure no fictional person has non-fictional person descendants. That is, they can have real parents and a real spouse, but no real children. That ensures no one on Geni will end up with a fictional line of descent.

> it was a regular practice for 19th C academics to speculate -- and then state as fact -- things that might have been in lost manuscripts,

This, I think, is a pivotal point. We can't emphasize it enough. It amounts to saying it could be true and there could have been evidence. Sure, there could have been evidence for just about any relationship you might want to imagine. But there isn't. We have what we have, Intellectual honesty prevents us from pretending, although perhaps not from dreaming.

Anne, it is not the later Nest ferch Cadell that Wolcott suggests may have been Merfyn's wife, but a contemporary Nest ferch Cynan ap Brochwell. I had already added her because, as you said, Rhodri did have a mother, and she does seem like a likely candidate. But I have no objection to her being disconnected with curator's notes.

Steven Mitchell Ferry --thanks; I misspoke.

Justin Durand -- what would you suggest, in this instance?

I hate to just cut her off, because so many of the sources that users come across provide her.

We could put in NN, with Nest verch Cadell as a nickname, lock it all down, and proved notes.

That way she would appear in searches.

What I would do -- and this is only a suggestion -- is let her remain as a fictitional person, wife of Merfyn, daughter of Cadell, but create an NN profile to be mother of Merfyn's children.

That way we can find her, see her, and be cautioned not to re-visit this same debate every time someone has a hankering to add her back.

On the other hand, I've never before considered the possibility of an NN profile with a fictitious nickname. That has interesting potential I think. Could be a whole new strategy for me.

Oooh, though, I like the suggestion of detaching her from Rhodri Mawr but keeping her in the tree. Nice.

Merfyn could have had more than one wife. Brehon Law permits two wives - it also permits an individual to claim kingship through a female heir (provided they too come from a ruling dynasty). We don't really know the status of Mann at that time - so it could very well have been Gaelic (Manx after all contains little influence from Welsh/Brythonic) and worth noting that when Rhodri was forced out of Gwynedd he fled to Ireland and not Mann. Point is they could have been Gaelicised Britons (or full on actually Irish).

I think the idea of "Which one is his wife?" is looked at from far to modern a context (one man one woman) and the idea that he may have had two isn't really explored! :)

Private User you are right in that he could have had several wives; that isn’t the issue here, though.

The issue is that the earliest MSS do not give him any wives at all, and the one he gets only shows up in later MSS and looks to be fulfilling an agenda.

What were you proposing be done in the Geni tree?