The famous elegy by Gruffudd ap yr Ynad Coch on the death of Llywelyn, the last native prince of Wales, does not allude directly esatto the crown of Britain, but calls him verso crowned king (aur dalaith) whose death disrupts the cosmic order
Grooms, The Giants of Wales, pp. 241–316. Bower, Scotichronicon VIII, Bk 15, chs. 26–30 (pp. 95–111). R. R. come funziona tinychat 187–9. For example, sopra 1401–1402, Hugh Eddouyer (Hywel Glyn Dw Edwer) undertook several diplomatic missions for Owain, and John Trefor, sometime bishop ? r’s cause mediante 1405, served on diplomatic missions sicuro of St Asaph, who defected puro Glyndw ? r Prince of Wales (Swansea, 1986; repr. 1996), p. 190. Scotland. Ian Skidmore, Owain Glyndw Bower, Scotichronicon II, Bk 3, ch. 34 (p. 65).
overlordship, and Arthur’s story becomes synonymous with English domination. Bower specifically equates the Britons, ‘Britannici generis’, with the Welsh, but by including the correspondence between Edward I, the Scots and the Pope during the First War of Independence, he also acknowledges the Plantagenet self-identification with the British myth.42 The elastic nature of this mythic world was undoubtedly one of its strengths. The kind of politics and the nature of identity vary significantly within these sources. Per both Wales and Scotland, the Arthurian heritage provided an image of the past that could be used puro comment on contemporary affairs and define the nature of identity. Scottish interpretations rejected the notion that Arthur conquered Scotland, although as descendents of the sons of Brutus they could see themselves as inheritors of Arthur’s kingdom. Welsh interpretations stressed the fact that they, as the original Britons (and not the English), were the true heirs onesto Arthur’s kingdom. Other poems invoke per more Galfridian world-view by calling him a ‘descendent of Beli’.43 There is per tradition that Llywelyn’s head was crowned with ivy when it was paraded through London, an act which mocked the prophecy which declared that Llywelyn would wear the crown of Britain.44 Edward I certainly took Llywelyn’s crown and an important relic, verso piece of the Holy Ciclocross, and destroyed his royal seals. From a symbolic point of view, these actions are more consistent with verso denial of Christian kingship, rather than Geoffrey’s British myth. Nevertheless, Llywelyn had invoked Geoffrey’s division of Britain sopra his dealings with the English king when he asserted his rights as the heir of Camber. This implied that Edward, as the heir of Locrinus, had some primacy which Llywelyn was willing onesto acknowledge.45 This position contrasts sharply with the Scottish response onesto Edward’s letter which denied that Historia Regum Britanniae gave him any right sicuro sovereignty in Scotland. After his death, Llywelyn does not ? r, seem esatto have attracted traditional material like his countryman, Owain Glyndw ? r was viewed as a returning hero, or William Wallace, a Scottish equivalent. However this view changed somewhat durante Humphrey Llwyd’s Chronica Walliae, written sopra 1584. Llwyd adopted the timeframe of the medieval Welsh chronicle tradition of the Brut y Tywysogion which began with Brutus’s heir, Cadwaladr the Blessed, and his rete di emittenti integrated Llywelyn into Geoffrey’s world-view. Arthur’s role is considerably diminished, but the history ends with Llywelyn unequivocally called the last of the native British line of Kings.46
Glyndw offering hope of eventual Welsh resurgence, while the response to Llywelyn’s death as expressed durante bardic poetry evoked images of cosmic disruption and despair
Bower, Scotichronicon V, Bk 9, ch. 56 (p. 171), ch. 61 (p. 185); VI, Bk 11, ch. 35–64 (pp. 99–189). ? r, 63–4, sopra Llawysgrif For example, Gruffudd ab yr Ynad Coch, 57–8, and Llygad Gw Hendregadredd, ed. J. Morris-Jones and T. H. Parry-Williams (Cardiff, 1933). J. Beverley Smith, Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, Prince of Wales (Cardiff, 1998), pp. 332–4. Smith, Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, pp. 335, 380–1, 543–6. Humphrey Llwyd, Chronica Walliae (1584), ed. Ieuan M. Williams (Cardiff, 2002), pp. 66, 69 and 174.