countrey absolutely within the Is◠of Britaine contrarily Southwales is very weak in situation and therefore open for the invasion of all Strangers but more especially of the Saxons that bordered even on the neck thereof And yet it had another inconvenience worse then all the rest by reason whereof it was reputed even in those dayes to be far worse then Northwales though it were greater in quantity and that is this Southwallia saith Giraldus quanquam quantitate longè major propter nobiles tamen qui vchelwyr quasi superiores viri vocantur quibus abundabat qui dominis rebelles esse solebant d minumque ferro detrectabant deterior esse videbatur Is it likely then that Roderic the great would prefer his Eldest son and soveraigne prince of the Britaine 's to a Kingdome that did not only want naturall fortification but had also the unhappinesse of having inhabitants whose condition and priviledges disposed them to Rebellion But if our opinions in this case be conceived not authentick as proceeding from prejudice Mr. Camden an indifferent person may be thought fit to decide the controversie And to say no more to this Argument let your own Countryman Giraldus his forementioned Incomparabiliter prevaile upon you to be of another judgment The third Argument THat Howel Dha the eldest son of Cadelh and succeeding him prince of Southwales did command the Archbishop of St. Davids and all the Bishops of Wales and chiefest of the Clergy to the number of 140. and all the Barons and Nobility of Wales and six of the most wise and best esteemed in every Commot of Wales for the Commonalty to assemble at his pallace called Y tu gwyn ar Tas in Dyved in Southwales where with great solemnity he did ordain the Lawes whereby Northwales and Powis and all the people throughout the whole dominion of Wales were governed and ordered untill after the conquering of Rees ap Theodor that King Henry the first did plant the common law of England first in the counties of Glamorgan and Pembrock which were conquered and made Counties from that time and that the Lords Marchers as they won into Wales did settle a forme of Justice mixt of the common law and of the lawes of Howel Dha yet so distempered as justly may be said with regal jurisdiction permitted for the time by the King of England that in the end it became as intolerable to the Crown as to the people which lawes of Howel Dha were neverthelesse entirely executed within so much of the principality of Northwales as continued in the four ancient counties there viz. Anglesey Carnarvan Merioneth and Flint and in the counties of Carmarthen and Cardigan in Southwales untill the subduing of Llewelyn ap Griffith the last prince of Northwales that King Edward the first ordained the statute of Ruthlan for justice to be done in these six last recited counties wherein all the principality of Wales then remained howbeit many of the lawes of Howel Dha continued in force as well in those counties as in the Lordships march rs untill the Statute of Wales in 27. H. 8. even as some few do continue to this day under the title of Customes Upon all which it is also concluded that to give or ordain lawes and with these muniments of Authority proveth without question a Soveraignty The Answer HOwel Dha prince of Southwales by reason of the incapacity as you say in your 5th Argument of the Heir apparent of Northwales took upon him the rule and government of all Wales Which being true it is not to be marvelled at if he commanded the clergy and nobility of all Wales to assemble before him that by their counsell and advice he might reforme the ancient lawes of the Brittaines nor yet if the succeeding princes of Northwales finding those lawes good wholsome and confirmed by the Sea Apostolick and also such as did not abrogate but confirme their Soveraignty over all Wales embraced them and commanded their subjects to obey them duly considering that his said Authority was grounded upon his regency over Northwales and the Heir thereof as manifestly appeares when Howel Dha in his said lawes saith that verbum regis Aberfraw est verbum super omnes reges Walliae nullius verbum est super ipsum So that whereas you would derive a soveraignty to Howel Dha from his power in making lawes you should first have suppressed or burnt all the Copies of the lawes of How Dha which give to the King of Northwales an absolute soveraignty over all Wales The fourth Argument THat the Bishops of Northwales were created and consecrated in Southwales by the Archbishop of St. Davids that they were his Suffragans and subject to his Sea And therefore Roderic in the division did aptly dispose the soveraign jurisdiction temporall in the territory where the soveraign jurisdiction spirituall was seated which otherwise had been absurd and would undoubtedly have bred great troubles The Answer IN regard the Soveraignty of the Eldest son of Roderic extended over all Wales it is not materiall in what part thereof the Ecclesiasticall supremacy be seated for be it in the territory of the third or second brother it cannot prejudice the Eldest that is Soveraign over all Your Argument did I hold it firme would perswade with me to make Edlstan the youngest son of Eghert to have a soveraignty over his eldest brother Ethelwolph as being King of Kent wherein is seated Canterbury the chiefest Sea for spirituall jurisdiction or well might I gather that the king of Dyved in whose Kingdome St. Davids lay was superior to Cadelh and his successors by reason of his good neighbourhood with the Archbishop The fifth Argument THat the prince of Southwales did seize the principality of Northwales and removed the princes thereof upon occasiou or offence committed as the said Howel Dha did seize the same partly by the incapacity of Meuric son of Edwal voel to govern and to stay the usurpation of others upon that pretence whereby to preserve the general peace of Wales and partly by forseiture for spoile that had been done by the prince of Northwales upon his countries of Cardigan and Ystradgwy This prince Howel as the writers of Northwales do record was of a goodly behaviour just and discreet in his government and beloved of men wherefore he obtained the attribute of Dha which is in English the good whereby it is to be concluded probably that his coming to the principality of Wales was upon just and lawfull grounds Likewise Owen ap Howel Dha his son prince of Southwales did seize Northwales out of the hands of Cadwalhon ap Jeuaf for usurpation and tyranny and made Mredith his third son Prince there which if it had been the soveraign seat he would not have permitted his younger son to enjoy it and to become thereby his superiour And in this point the writers of Northwales do obscure the truth with some art by concealing this to be done by the power of the father
conquisita fuit per dominum Edwardum nuper regem Angliae proavum demini principis nunc per quem conquestum tota terra tam de dominio quam in servitiis injuncta fuit annexa coronae Angliae The seventh Argument AFter this conquest of Wales by the overthrow of Rees ap Theodor and the expulsion of his son Griff ap Rees who was forced to fly to Ireland Griff ap Conan being then prince of Northwales and of greatest power of any prince there sithence the said division never stirred for the principality of Southwales which if he had been the supreme Prince of Wales by this occasion he should most properly and justly have done neither did any of the Princes of Northwales succeeding him to the last prince Lhewelyn ap Griffith make claime thereunto Albeit they were all of them one after the other the most powerfull worthy fortunate Princes that had ruled in Northwales since the division as OweÌ„ Gwynâ—th David ap Owen Lhewelyn ap Jorwerth David ap Lhewelyn and that they had the advantage in their times of the alteration of seven Kings of England a troubled state there to have attempted it But Griff ap Rees returning from Ireland to recover his patrimony in the weaknesse of his fortunes retired to Griff. ap Conan then prince of North wales whose daughter he had married had by her worthy sons Of whose return purpose Henry the first King then of England understanding knowing him to be the undoubted heir of Wales and that he would be received by the people sent for the prince of Northwales and drew him in to yield to the delivery of Griff ap Rees into his hands which the Prince attempted and had effected accordingly but that Griff ap Rees upon some notice thereof hardly escaped into the Sanctuary of Aberdaron whence the prince would have forced him but that he was rescued by the whole clergy of the countrey and thence conveyed to Southwales whereupon it is evident that if Griff. ap Conan had been soveraign prince of Wales de jure first no necessity compelling him he would not have been so undiscreet as to have put himselfe into the King of England's hands who claimed the soveraignty thereof neither would the king have suffered him to depart seeing by detaining him he might more easily have compassed his end Secondly the Prince of Northwales would not have been so injurious to himself as to have delivered Griffith ap Rees if he had been his homager of Southwales whereby to divest himself of his right thereunto by his own act But it is plaine that the prince of Northwales in respect of the conquering of Rees ap Theodor having submitted himself to the King of England as his homager and to his peace came to the king at his sending for him knowing well that the King was carelesse of him as touching the right of Soveraignty of Wales And so he yeilded to make his peace the firmer with the King to the betraying of his Superior of his guest and son in law and the son of him who got him the possession of the principality of Northwales Hereupon Griff ap Rees put himselfe in armes and so held himself during King Henries time and a part of King Stephens recovering a great part of Southwales and died leaving his troubles and possessions to his son called the Lord Rees who in the end made peace with king Henry the second and surrendred to him his title to the principality of Wales bringing the chiesest of the Nobility and Gentry of Southwales to Glocester where they submitted themselves to the King and received their lands and possessions by the Kings grant to hold of him And the Lord Rees accepted of the King to be his Justice of Southwales which office continued untill 27. of King Henry the 8. and ended in the Lord Ferrers of Chartley The Answer FOr Answer hereunto you must first conceive that Griffith ap Conan at the time of Rees ap Theodor's death was not so powerfull as you make him to be for as we read in the Author of his life he was then but newly escaped out of the Earl of Chester's prison where he had remained 12. years Secondly that notwithstanding his unsettled state in Northwales by reason of his said imprisonment and the King of Englands displeasure conceived against him he joyned forces with Cadwgan ap Bledhyn his son in law and entring Southwales after they had slaine in battell a great number of Normans a great part thereof though not all became subject to Cadwgan as the British history of the Princes relateth wherein also we find that afterwards Griff ap Conan sent his sons Owen and Cadwalladr twice to Southwales being one time accompanied with 6000 Footmen and 2000 Horsemen they took the Castles of Walter Espec and Richard de la Mare and also the Castles of Aberystwyth Dinerth and Caerwedros subduing the whole countrey to the town of Cardigan and after the slaughter of 3000 Normans in the field they chased the rest out of the Country restoring Griffith ap Rees to his father's inheritance and the ancient inhabitants to their former dwellings Which is sufficient evidence that they made claime to Southwales as soveraign Princes And Griffith ap Conan cannot be imagined to interest himselfe in the cause especially in his weaknesse by sending his subjects to the field but that he challenged the soveraignty thereof as due by inheritance and his son Owen Gwynedd prince of Northwales would not have entred Southwales in the first year of his reign as the Chronicle witnesseth overthrowing the Castles of Ystratmeuric Stephens and Hwmphreys and burning the town of Carmarthen and compelling part of Dyved to pay tribute unto him as Gwalchmai ap Meilir that lived in that age hath recorded retaining most of Cardigan in his own hands without claime or pretence of title Likewise when Henry 2. King of England made his third Expedition against Wales the Lord Rees and the power of Southwales and all the other Lords of Wales with their forces marched against the King under the conduct of the Prince of Northwales which directly proveth his soveraignty over all Wales After these tumults and turmoils Lhewelyn ap Jorwerth Prince of Northwales to prevent all doubt that might arise concerning his right made all Southwales and Powis swear fealty unto him as the book of Conwey makes good wherein we read that they acknowledged the like fealty to David his son and Lhewelyn the last Prince But as concerning the unkind dealing of Griff ap Conan with Gr ap Rees and Gr ap Conan's going to the King of England I cannot see how that deserves an answer as an Argument for the soveraignty in the Princes of Southwales Lastly you affirme that the Lord Rees surrendred his title to the principality of Wales to the King of England which seems unto me most improbable considering he would not voluntarily depose himself of such royall preheminence and
beat out the truth of the point in question I cannot conceive so in regard you have not been pleased to be so particular in your quotation of Authors as could be desired And whereas you think it not fit to register the acts of Wales under Usurpers it seems you would deprive your reader of a perfect history and conceale such passages which are a requisite to be known as the lawfullest proceedings in that a history how rugged soever the passages thereof may be ought to testify the truth by the consent of times and immediate succession of Princes otherwise that will appear like a broken chaine wanting some necessary lincks to unite the whole neither will man's desire be satâ—sfied untill it receive instruction who were and who were not Usurpers and how their government differed or whether Usurpers being really possessed of the Crown did not use the same jurisdiction which belonged unto the right heir and withall t is far more fit decent that the acts of Wales should be registred under the name of those Vsurpers of Northwales in regard that all Wales was subject to the crown thereof then under the princes of Southwales who were as I said their subjects tributaries though the lawfull heirs of Cadelh And in my judgment you cannot so confidently excuse your Southwales government from usurpation for that time seeing Rotherchap Jestin and others are acknowledged to be Vsurpers within the compasse of the time limited You may be further convinced touching the truth of our allegation if you do but indifferently weigh the evident proofs that follow upon these grounds First how the soveraignty continued in Northwales before the daies of Roderic the great Secondly how Anarawd Prince of Northwales was Roderic's eldest son And lastly how the Princes of Southwales and Powis paid tribute to the Prince of Northwales To the first if you look back into the times before Roderic's raigne you must confesse Cadwalhon lhawhir King of Northwales was chiefest of the four that bare swords before Arthur at the triumphant feast of Caerlheon of which number as Galfridus Monemutensis affirmes the King of Southwales was one or you must deny the testimony of your George Owen Harry pag. 26. Then afterwards when the Britains wanted a supreme governour there was a generall meeting had for the election of a King and a continuall supply was had from the Princes of Northwales as first it may appear when after the death of Vortiporius whom we call Gwerthevyr the Britains met at Traeth Maelgwn as may be seen in those ancient British laws intituled Prawf ynad Lhe y caffas Maelgwn vot yn pennaf brenhin ac Aberffraw yn pen lhyssoedh a Jarlh Mathyraval a jarlh Dinevwr a iarlh Caerlh on y danaw ynteu whicâ— may be thus Englished Where it was ordained that Malgwn Prince of Northwales should be the chiefest or soveraign King and Aberffraw in Northwales the soveraign seat of the Britains and that the Earls of Powis Southwales and Caerlheon should be under him and obey him And after that when the Princes of Southwales Powis and Cornwall after the battell of Bangor met at Chester where with the consent of all those Princes Cadvan Prince of Northwales was made King of Britaine after him succeeded in their own right Cadwalhon his son and Cadwalader his grandchild at which time the Britains lost the soveraignty of the whole Isle as Galfridus saith And yet Râ—deris Molwynoc Prince of Northwales the Grandchild of Cadwalader was obeyed by all the British Princes as their supreme and soveraignâ— Prince and called also King of the Britains according to all Authors and so was his son Conan Tindaethwy and after him Mervyn Vrych King of Man who in the right of his wife Essyllt Conan's daughter was sole Prince of all Wales as your own George Oweu Harry and all other writers testify and after them succeeded Roderic the great their son who as Giraldus saith toti Walliae praesidebat So then hitherto that is 300 years before Anarawd's raign it was not controverted who had the soveraignty for it being most manifest that the soveraignty of Wales remained in Northwales it may perswade an indifferent Reader that Roderic would not alter the course of the Soveraignty being a matter of that ancient continuance especially when it must be confessed that the Prince of Northwales was eldest son and heir apparent to his father Rod ric as both old and late writers do with one consent confesse of which for brevities sake I will make choice but of few but such as are reputed to be of best credit and insight in Antiquity to assist me with their testimonies And first of all Dr. Powel in his notes upon Giraldus and additions to Caradocus proveth that Anarawd was the eldest son of Roderic the great and sayth farther that he was the right heir of Cadwalader as is evident by all histories Sr. John Prise a Scuthwales Gentleman in his description of Cambria saith that Rodericus magnus King of Wales gave Northwales as the chiefest part to his eldest son Humphry Llwyd in his Breviary of Britain and Jo. Leyland in his notes upon his book intituled Genethliacon Edvardi principis and the book of Hergest written in the dayes of Ed. 4. averre that Roderic gave Northwales to his eldest son adding withall that Cadelh who had Southwales was the third son Cyndhelw brydydd mawr that is Cyndhelw the great pâ—et who flourished in the daies of Henry the second King of England writeth thus I Rodri mawr vawr vilwriaeth Gymro I rai Gymru hâ—laeth A Gwynedh nwn gynnydh aâ—th I vab hynaf y pennaeth Caradocus Lancarvanensis forementioned who wrot in the dayes of Henry the first testifies in some copies of his Annals that Roderic had by his wife Angharad diverse sons as Anarawd his eldest son to whom he gave Aberffraw with Northwales Our old books of pedigrees written on parchment above 400 years ago do attribute the seniority of birth to Anarawd the son of Roderic the great and not to Cadelh To conclude Asser Menevensis Bishop of St. Davids who flourished even in the dayes of the sons of Roderic saith in the acts of King Alfred that Anaraut filius Rotri cum suis fratribus ad postremum amicitiam Northanhymbrorum dâ—serens de qua nullum bonum nisi damnum habuerat amicitiam Alfredi regis studiose requirens ad praesentiam illius aavenit cumque à rege houorificè receptus esset ad manum Episcopi in filium consirmatiâ—nis acceptus maximisque donis ditatus regis dominio cum omnibus suis cadem conditione subdidit ut in omnibus regiae voluntati sic obediens esset sicut Ethered cum Mercis Here your countryman gives our Anarawd a superiority over his brethren esteeming them no otherwise then his inferiors and subjects as plainly it appears when he saith that King Alfred of all the brethren honoured enriched with great gifts and entred into league with Anarawd only This testimony
your Argument And here I do greatly marvel who those six Kings of Southwales were that as you say assumed to their hands the government of Northwales for Mredyth ap Owen was neither king nor heir apparent of Southwales when he conquered Northwales and Howel ap Edwyn was King of Southwales when Griffith ap Lhewelyn undertook the rule of Northwales and in like manner Mredyth ap Owen ap Edwym governed Southwales when Biedhyn ap Cynfyn received the principality of Northwales at the hands of the king of England doing homage for the same whereby it is evident that these three princes were not of the six that you mention and Howel Dha with Lhewelyn ap Seissyllt though they were most worthy and noble princes yet cannot exceed the number of two therefore the number of six must needs be a mistake It is also to be observed that these princes Mredyth Griff Bledhyn and Trahayarn ap Caradoc after they had settled themselves in the sure and quiet possession of Northwales seised to their hands the Kingdome of Southwales and held the same either by strong hand and usurpation or by state of inheritance or else in the right of Soveraignty over all Wales that belonged to the crown of Nâ—rthwales Usurpers they were not if it be true that as you say in the end of your Treatise Southwales did never faile of a lawfull Prince to govern it till the period thereof by the fatall overthrow of prince Rees ap Theodor lawfull heires also to Cadelh they cannot be for the posterity of Enâ—on the son of Owen king of Southwales and eldest brother to the said Mredyth were living and therefore they could not challenge Southwales by inheritance it remaines then of necessity that their title to Southwales was grounded on the soveraignty that belonged to the king of Northwales whereof they were princes But howsoever the matter went it is certaine that they were kings of Northwales and being so they took into their hands the regiment of Southwales whereby I do conclude it was a grosse error in you when you say that no prince of Northwales did ever rule in Southwales or by any occasion did claime the principality thereof seeing the examples of four princes must cause you to confesse either your ignorance or partiall censure Lastly you say that Rees ap Theodor prince of Southwales with great valor and wisdome did expell Trahern ap Caradoc the last usurper of Nerthwales and placed Griff ap Conan in the quiet possession thereof but antiquity the truth will informe us otherwise for in the life of Griff. ap Conan we may read that when the said Griffith with his navy landed at Portcleis neer St. Davids your powerfull prince Rees had been a little before deprived of his Kingdome by Trahayarn king of Northwales and others and for safegard of his life had covertly taken Sanctuary at St. Davids but hearing of Griffith's approach he came with the Bishop and all the clergy of that house to meet him where Rees fell upon his knees before Griffith and acquainting him with his ill fortunes desired his help and aid to fight with those his adversaries promising to do him homage and to reward him with the moity of his Revenues and Griff pittying his estate yeelded to his request and having overthrown in battell his enemies he installed Rees in the quiet possession of Southwales entred and destroyed Powis with fire and sword and recovered the Kingdome of Northwales his due inheritance here withall I find an entry made to Powys by a prince of Northwales before the fatall overthrow of Rees ap Theâ—dor which you deny in your first Argument The sixth Argument THat the kings of England did ground their title to the principality and soveraignty of Wales upon the conquering of Rees ap Theodor prince of Wales in the raign of Rufus and not upon the subduing of Lhewelyn ap Griffiu in the raign of Edward the first as the writers of Northwales do alledge for from the conquering of Rees ap Theodor all the withstanding of the power of the kings of England in Wales was termed by them Rebellion and Treason which before alwaies had the name of War And thenceforth the Kings of England did give Seigniories and possessions in Wales to their English subjects and so the Lords Marchers began and thenceforth were the strong Castles and Forts erected and Garrisons planted in all parts of Wales wherein either the Kings of England or the Lords Marchers did set footing which grounded in the Kings of England a resolution to prosecute and accomplish the absolute conquest of Wales And thereby the bishoprick of St. Davids and by that sea all the rest of the Bishopricks of Wales were brought under the jurisdiction of Canterbury And thereupon Griff. ap Conan and the rest of the princes of Northwales succeeding yeilded to the kings of England submission for that principality and to hold the same of the crown of England and gave them pledges to abide in their peace And the kings of England were stayed from the absolute conquest of Northwales chiefly by their unsettled state in England being full of troubles especially by the French and Barons wars which were no sooner ended but that King Henry the third and his son Edward 1. took Northwales from Lhewelyn the last yet adding thereby no more to his former possession of the principality of Wales as the statute of Ruthlan doth shew but terram de Snowdon and accounting Lhewelyn not an Enemie but a Rebell as appeared by fixing his head on the highest turret of the Tower of London and executing his brother David for Treason whereas the English did deliver the slain body of Rees ap Theodor to a decent and honourable buriall in the Abbey of Ystradflwr The Answer ALthough the Kings of England after the overthrow of Rees ap Theodor did terme the withstanding of their power in Wales rebellion and Treason it cannot be conceived that should be a sufficient ground for their title to the principality of Wales for what are those termes but the hard censure of their utter and alwaies professed enemies in their greatest anger and indignation peradventure after some shamefull overthrow and losse received and therefore not much to be regarded But it cannot be granted they gave such names to those wars for the wars between King John with his Successors the Kings of England and Lhewelyn the great David his son Owen Goch and Lhewelyn ap Griffith Princes of Wales are alwaies termed Guerrae as it appears in the submissions of David ap Lhewelyn An 1240. 1241. of Owen Goch and Lhewelyn An the adward of Ottobonus the Pope's Legate An 1268. and the agreement between Edward the first and the said Lhewelyn prince of Wales An 1277. do likewise call those wars Guerrae which doth not in any Author signifie Rebellion as must needs be acknowledged Now that the kings of England thenceforth did give Seigniories and possessions in Wales to their
soveraignty without he were brought to such extremity that there were no other remedy whereas it is evident that the Lord Rees was in great favour with King Henry the second at the time you mention and had been for many years before witnesse the Office of being Justice of Southwales which the King had given him three years before that peace at Glocester as the book of Conwey mentioneth then also that he brought to the King's peace at Glecester no lords of Northwales or Powis but few of Southwales such as had formerly offended the King whereby it appears that his said resignation if there were any such extended no farther then his title of Southwales only and yet in regard that all the English writers do terme and stile the said Lord Rees King of Southwales even to the last period of his life I cannot readily believe that there was any such surrender made untill the same do appear by some Authentick record The eighth Argument THat the Princes of Northwales though some late writers of those parts call them Princes and Kings of Wales did not write themselues so nor were taken to be so in their time when there was fit occasion to set forth their title But ever since the conquering of Rees ap Theodor they did acknowledge this title from the Kings of England as may appear by the said submissions and transactions between the kings of England and the Princes of Northwales from the death of Rees ap Theodor to the death of Lhewelyn the last prince even as they are related by the writers of Northwales And which maketh it more evident when the Pope did absolve Lhewelyn ap Jorwerth from his oath of obedience made to King John and David ap Lhewelyn from his oath of obedience made to King Henry the third he gave them the title of Princes of Northwales only whereas both the Princes would have sought and the Pope would have yeilded them the title of Princes of Wales in that case especially for the larger extent of their absolutions if there had been ground for it Likewise it appeareth by the excommunication of Lhewelyn ap Iorweth when as he persisted in action against King Iohn after the Pope had made his end with the King that the Pope stiled him Prince of Northwales only and the colour that those writers do take to terme them of Northwales Princes of Wales was for that after the subduing of Rees ap Theodor the people of Wales had no other in their distresses to resort unto for protection but the Princes of Northwales And in that respect and not otherwise there being then no Princes of Southwales Lhewelyn ap Iorwerth Prince of Northwales being incited by the Pope and Barons against King Iohn did assume a command in most parts of Wales but it ceased in short time and he submitted himselfe and his country to King Henry the third The Answer IT it is certain that the Princes of Northwales howsoever they did lay down their titles were alwaies reputed and taken to be the soveraign Kings of Britaine Princes of Wales for Caradoc Lancarvan in Glamorganshire speaking of Anarawd prince of Northwales gives him the title and honour of King of the Britaines and chief King of Wales as is manifest in the ancient copies of his History Idwall oel his son is called by William Malmesbury and others Rex omnium Wallensium The same stile or the like in effect Caradocus attributeth unto the sons of Idwal Howel ap Jevaf Meredith ap Owen and Bleddyn ap Cynvyn Princes of Northwales Trhayarn ap Caradoc is called King of Wales by George Owen Harry a Gentleman of Southwales Griff ap Conan whom Mr. Camden calleth princeps Walliae was acknowledged by Rees ap Theodor himself to be Brenhin Brenhincedh Cymru that is King of the Kings of Wales as the Author of Griffiths life averreth whereby it clearly appears that the said Rees prince of Southwales pretended no right to the Soveraignty of Wales And Caradocus also saith that Griff ap Conan prince of Northwales was pâ—nna brenhin ac amdhiffynnwr a thangnefedhwr Crmruoll that is the chiefest King defender and peace-maker of all Wales Leoline the great also is by Mathew Paris Mat Westminster Polidor and all our British Antiquities termed prince of Wales and sometimes king of Wales as in an old British Ode dedicated to Lhewelyn by one Encon wan a Bard of that age is extant wherein he is called Gwir frenhin Cymru that is the true or naturall king of Wales And David Benvras a Bard of great estimation in his time in the funerall Elegy of David Lhewelyn's son calleth him mab brenhin Cymru that is the son of the king of Wales In like manner Prince David and Leotine the last are termed most commonly Princes of Wales by all Authors And here I may not passe how that our great Antiquary Mr. Selden in his notes upon Mi Draiton his Polilbion gives our Princes from Anarawd to the last prince the name and title of princes of Wales adding withall that after the division among Roderic Mawr's sons the principality was chiefly in Northwales and the rest as tributaries to the Prince of that part Seeing therefore that the princes of Northwales even from Roderic's time to Lhewelyn ap Griffith were reputed and taken to be the undoubted Princes and Kings of Wales I cannot be induced to change my opinion upon bare pretences be they never so specious Furthermore it is confessed that the Princes of Northwales did acknowledg as well the principality of Wales as the title thereof to the kings of England yet not only after the death of Rees ap Theodor but many hundred years before as it appears by tribute paid by our Princes unto the kings of England in acknowledgment thereof for in the dayes of the old Britains Tair talaith as we find in an old British Manuscript and in the British Triades a dheleid y dala wrth goron Lundain un ym-Henrhyn Rhionydhyny Gogledh ar ail daleith yn Aberfraw ar drydedh yn Gerniw that is three Coronets ought to be held of the Crown of London the one was the Crown or Coronet of Penrhynrhionydd in the North the second was of Aberfraw and the third that of Corawall And touching the Pope's absolution of Lhewelyn ap Jorwerth from an oath of obedience to the king of England by stiling him Prince of Northwales whence you infer that he was not Soveraign of any other part else the Pope would have given it him in his stile it concerns you before you make good your conceit herein to propose unto us the Pope's own words in the Originall and then to shew your self to be of his Counsell that when he named Northwales the chiefest seat you might be sure he did thereby intend to take away the Soveraignty over the rest of Wales And that Northwales exceeded Southwales in respect of supremacy you may be easily convinced if you look back into those times when the Britains
lost the crown and scepter of London as we find in Prawf Ynad being an ancient MS containing the old laws of the Britains Then by a generall assembly of the men of Gwynedh Powys Deheubarth Evas Morganwâ— and Sersyllwe it was ordained that Aberfraw in Northwales should be the chiefest seat and the king thereof the soveraign King of all the British Princes And King Howel Dha in his Laws mentioneth a tribute due to the king of Northwales from the kings of Southwales and Powis whereby and by the inquisition before specified it is apparent that the title of Aberffraw or Northwales in effect is as large ample and honourable as the title of all Wales The ninth Argument IF King Edward the first of England had not accounted Wales to be his by the conquest of Rees ap Theodor he might have assumed against Lhewelyn ap Griff. the title of Mâ—rtimer his subject in the right of Gwladice his wife sole sister and heir of David ap Lhewelyn the last lawfull prince of Northwales for Griffith ap Lhewelyn his eldest Brother father to Lhewelyn the â—â—st Prince was base born But neither did the King think good to borrow that title nor did the Mortimers albeit they were raised to be Earâ—s of March and becoming the strongest subjects in alliances and kindreds augmented the same by marrying the sole daughter and heir of the Duke of Clarâ—nce whereby they had after the crown of England ever claime the principality of Wales yea though they were in disgrace with the state of England and were in action against Henry the fourth which such mighty persons would hardly have omitted if the house of Northwales had had good right to the principality of Wales Neither would the policy of the State of England have suffered the rising of that house which by an undoubted right to Wales might have bereaved them thereof yet such right as they had is now lawfully vested in the crown by king Edward the fourth as heir to Mortimer The Answer IT appeareth in the statute of Ruthlan that Edward 1. did not claime or account the principality of Wales to be his by the overthrow of Rees ap Theodor for the assumes the glory of the conquest of Wales to himself as is manifest before in my answer to the 6. Argument whereunto for your better satisfaction in this point I remit you And the reason that he borrowed not the title of Mortimer his subject although it be a thing seldome or never heard of that the titles of Kingdomes should be borrowed or lent and that his said subject himself did not seize upon the said principality from Leoline the last as his right by inheritance was because that Mortimer had no right thereunto for Gwlades his wife was the sole sister of Griffith the eldest son of Lhewelyn the great who left behind him diverse children and not of David according to your allegation as by most strong arguments and ancient authority shall appear I doubt not but to your full satisfaction And first of all Ralph Lord Mortimer of Wigmâ—re the husband of Gwlades dhu did procure with all his might the deliverance of Griffith out of his Brother Davia's prison and also labour for his installment in the principality of Wales as is apparent in Mathew Paris which he would never have done it his wiâ—e had been the sole sister and heir of David for by the raising of Griffith to the throne of Wales he should not only depose David but also most indiscreetly exclude himselfe from being heir apparent to the principality of Wales and next to rule after David who had no issue Secondly the Lord Mortimer after the death of prince David made no claime to the principality which in no wâ—se he would have omitted if he had been his heir apparent and the king of Englands nephew as you pretend who for the recovery of his right would minister unto him sufficient aid both in men and money But this neglect infallibly denoteth that Gwlades with her posterity was not the heir of David seeing that Leoline held that peaceably with the consent of the King And in an old book written above 200 years ago I found the pedegree of Richard Duke of York father of king Edward the 4. wherein the Dukes descent is first brought to the Mortimers by Anne his Mother and from the Mortimers to the Princes of Wales by the said Gwlades as being sister and heir of Griffith and not of David even thus Leolinus fuit princeps Walliae pater Gladys ddu haeres suus fuit Griffinus princeps Walliae qui habuit quatuor filios Lewâ—linum ille fuit ultimus princeps Walliae Owinnm David Rodri qui decesserunt sine haered bus ideo revertamur ad Gladys Dhu quam Radulphus Mortimer duxit in uxorem Lewelyn was Prince of Wales and the father of Glaays ddû his heir was Griffith Prince of Wales who had 4. sons viz. Lewelyn the last Prince of Wales Owen David and Rodri who dyed without heirs therefore let us come back again to Gladys ddu whom Ralph Mortimer married Hereby it appeareth that Griffith was Lâ—welyn ap Jorwerth's son heir therefore born in Wedlock that his four sons leaving no Heirs as that Author saith the right of the principality descended to the posterity of Gwladus which directly proveth she was sister of the whole bloud to Griffith and not to David of whom the Author maketh no mention at all accounting him and his sisters some of whose posterity live at this day no better then Bastards Thirdly our ancient books of pedegrees do with one consent affirme that the children of Leoline ap Jor were Griffith and Gwlades dhu whose mother was Tanglwyst the daughter of Lhowarch goch of Ros David Prince of Wales Gwenlliant Angharad and Marvred whose Mother was Joan the Daughter of King John The white book of Hergest a very fair and ancient parchment Manuscript saith that prince Lhewelyn wedded one Tanglwyst the daughter of Llowarch Lord of Anglesey and begat by her Griff. and Gwladys dee Gwilym Tew that flourished in the daies of Henry 6. hath written that Leolin ap Jorwerth begat Gwladus ddu upon the daughter of Llowarch goch which was the mother of Griffith And last of all I find it noted in an old manuscript thus Lewelinus Gervasii filius princeps Walliae primo desponsavit Tanglwyst filiam Lhowarch Vychan de qua genuit Griffith Gwlades ddu quondam uxorem Radulphi de Mortuomari post mortem dictae Tanglwyst idem Lâ—welynus desponsavit Joannam filiam Johannis regis Angliae de qua genuit David principem Gwenlliant uxorem Jo Lacie comitis Lincolnia Angharad primo desponsata Johanni de Brewys domino de Brechon post cujus decessum desponsata fuit Malgoni Vachan ap Maelgon ap Rees ex eadem uxore genuit filiam quae maritata est Johanni Scotico comiti Cestriae qui fuit nepos Ranulphi comitis Cestriae ex parte