British antiquities revived, or, A friendly contest touching the soveraignty of the three princes of VVales in ancient times managed with certain arguments whereunto answers are applyed by Robert Vaughan, Esq. ; to which is added the pedigree of the Right Honourable the Earl of Carbery, Lord President of Wales ; with a short account of the five royall tribes of Cambria, by the same author.

The Answer.

WHereas you alledge that your authorities and reasons are de∣livered simply to 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 Usur∣pers, it seems you would deprive your reader of a perfect history, and conceale such passages which are a requisite to be known, as the law∣fullest 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; nei∣ther will man's desire be sat••sfied, untill it receive instruction, who were, and who were not Usurpers, and how their government diffe∣red, or whether Usurpers being really possessed of the Crown, did not use the same jurisdiction which belonged unto the right heir: and withall tis far more fit & decent that the acts of Wales should be regi∣stred under the name of those Vsurpers of Northwales, in regard that all Wales was subject to the crown thereof, then under the princes of South∣wales, (who were, as I said, their subjects & tributaries,) though the lawfull heirs of Cadelh. And in my judgment you cannot so confi∣dently 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 indiffe∣rently weigh the evident proofs that follow upon these grounds. First how the soveraignty continued in Northwales before the daies of Ro∣deric the great. Secondly, how Anarawd Prince of Northwales was Ro∣deric'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 Cadwal∣hon 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 go∣vernour, 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 Mael∣gwn vot yn pennaf brenhin, ac Aberffraw yn pen lhyssoedh, a Jarlh Mathy∣raval, a jarlh Dinevwr, a iarlh Caerlh. on y danaw ynteu: whic•• 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 R••deris Molwynoc Prince of Northwales, the Grandchild of Cadwalader was obeyed by all the British Princes as their supreme and soveraign•• 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 sove∣raignty of Wales remained in Northwales, it may perswade an indiffe∣rent Reader that Roderic would not alter the course of the Soveraign∣ty, 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 in∣sight in Antiquity, to assist me with their testimonies. And first of all Dr. Powel in his notes upon Giraldus, and additions to Caradocus, pro∣veth 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 Genethli∣acon 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 p••et, who flourished in the daies of Henry the second King of England, writeth thus:

I Rodri mawr vawr vilwriaeth Gymro I rai Gymru h••laeth A Gwynedh nwn gynnydh a••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 con∣clude, 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 Northan∣hymbrorum d••serens, de qua nullum bonum nisi damnum habuerat, amici∣tiam Alfredi regis studiose requirens, ad praesentiam illius aavenit, cum{que} à rege houorificè receptus esset, & ad manum Episcopi in filium consirma∣ti••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 with the rest is sufficient to prove, that Anarawd Prince of Northwales was the el∣dest son of Roderic the great, and therefore soveraign King of the Bri∣tains, which Merdhin Silvester 300 years before Anarawds birth fore∣told, to wit, that he should be supreme prince of the Britains after his father Roderic. Now time calleth me to come to my last argument,

which is, that the Princes of Southwales and Powis payed a tribute to the Prince of Northwales. Wherein (to deale briefly) I will not trou∣ble you here with the testimony of our great Antiquary Mr. Selden before mentioned in my Answer to your 8. Argument; nor with the authorities of our other late writers, but will content my selfe with the ancient laws of our British Princes, where thus we read: Try mych∣deyrn dyledoc a dhylu gwladychu Cymruoll danei thervyneu, brenin Aber∣ffraw, arglwydh Dinefwr, a hwn Mathraval, Tri phrif lys arbenic sydh ir tri theyrn hyn yn essyddyneu breiniawl ydhynt. Vn yw Aberffraw yngwy∣nedh, Dynevwr yny Deheu, a Mathraval wynva ym Powys: a llyma mal y dosparthwyd eu teyrnasau hwynt yn dair rhan, vn bie vchafiaeth ar y dhwy, nit amgen noc Aberffraw pie y bendevigaeth. Teir mychdeyrn dhylyet adhy∣lyir o Gymru olh, Aberffraw gan y dhwylys hynny adhylu, vn o Dhinefwr, sef yw honno melget, pedeir tunelh o vel a gassei pedeir mu ymhob tunelh, dwy grenneit ymhob mu, lhwyth deuwr ar drossol ym hob gren: Peillget o Wynva a ymodh hunw hefyd. Thus Englished. Three lawfull Kings ought to rule all Wales under its bounds, the King of Aberffraw in Northwales, the Lord of Dinefwr, and this of Mathraval: these three Princes have three principall courts for their Princely dwellings, Aber∣ffraw in Northwales, Dinefwr in Southwales, and Mathraval wynfa in Powis. Thus their Dominions were divided into three parts, one hath a soveraignty over the other two, viz. Aberffraw hath the Primacy. Three princely Tributs are due out of all Wales, whereof Aberffraw ought to have from those two seats, one from Dinefwr, which is a tri∣bute of honey, viz. 4. tuns of Honey, every tun containing 4. mu, every mu 4. grens, every gren as much as two men could carry between them on a leaver: the other is the like quantity of flower, of Mathraval wyn∣va. This I hold sufficient proof that that Southwales and Powis were tributaries to Northwales: and this should suffice me for this time, had not Howel Dha a prince of Southwales and the son of Cadelh de∣creed in his Laws, that as the King of Northwales was to pay a tribute to the King of London, so should all the Kings of Wales pay tribute to the King of Northwales. LXIII libras est mychdeyrn dyled quod rex Aberfrau reddere debet regi Londoniae semel cùm acceperit terram suam ab eo; p••stea verò omnes reges Walliae debent terram suam ab eoaccipere, i. e. à rege Aberffraw, & illi reddere meicheerd deleet & abediw p••st eorum mor∣tem,

& verbum illius, verbum est super omnes reges, & nullius verbum est super ipsum: that is to say, sixty three pounds is the Monarchicall tri∣bute, which the King of Aberfraw ought to the King of London when once he hath received his lands of him: afterwards all the Kings of Wales ought to take their lands of him, that is, of the King of Aber∣fraw, and to pay him a reliefe after their death. And his law is a law over the Kings, and no mans law is over him. So saith Howel Dha.

The weight of these reasons makes me omit diverse others, and ma∣ny conjectures, together with the vulgar opinion; for seeing before Roderic's time the case is made out by good proofs, and that in Rode∣ric and his sons times, and their posterity, it is still strengthned with the authorities of both Southwales and Northwales new and old wri∣ters, I see no reason why you should not conclude with me, That the Princes of Northwales had the soveraignty over all Wales.