PARRY Family History

The Parrys of the Golden Valley, Herefordshire: A Variety of Beginnings

As explained on the main Golden Valley pedigree page, establishing a suitable "start point" for discussion of the Parry family is problematic. On this page the information given in various sources is shown, and some possible reasons as to why it may, or may not, be accurate are discussed. Not all of the accounts are quoted in full, since the information is not relevant to the initial stages being discussed here. However full details for certain entries are given, either because the style of the writing requires it for a better understanding, or because the absence of certain details itself reflects upon the issue of the start of the line.

If you have any comments about the information on these pages, or can add further details, then please contact me.

The main "Parrys of the Golden valley" Discussion page

Parry Pedigrees Index page
Top

The Visitation of South Wales & the adjoining March, William Ballard c.1480

[Source: Published in Visitations by the Heralds in Wales, M P Siddons, 1996]

Clearly there is nothing in the manuscript itself to enable identification of this entry.

The father of Thomas ap Harry who died in 1522 was another Thomas ap Harry, according to the later pedigrees, so it could be either of these (or someone else of the same name) being referred to here. The recording of the surname as "Herry" should be noted, but is perhaps unlikely to be important. In later sources the great grandfather of Thomas ap Harry, (or grandfather, depending on which Thomas it was), is shown as a John ap Harry, who was sheriff of Herefordshire in 1399 and an MP for the county on several occasions. Some entries in the Patent Rolls concerning John also record his surname as "Herry". Whilst these all need checking as much as possible to ensure that they do refer to the same man, an explanation based on either mistranscription, or the recording of Welsh names by English scribes, would be plausible.

[The various occurrences of "ap Henry" and "ap Harry" will not be pointed out each time they occur, in view of the fact that Henry and Harry are used interchangeably as first names. However, it is something to be remembered since eventually they could resolve into the separate surnames of Penry and Parry.]

Top

The Visitation of South Wales & Herefordshire, William Fellow 1531

[Source: Published in Visitations by the Heralds in Wales, M P Siddons, 1996]

The absence of a specific Parry entry in this Visitation does seem slightly surprising to me, since the family had born Arms for some years. By 1531 Thomas ap Harry, mentioned with regard to Ballard's book above, had died but the heir, George ap Harry, appears to have been at Poston.

Again, it is perhaps important to realise that, if the editor's comments are removed, the only clear record of Parrys in this Visitation is the mention of Rychard ap Harry, and that there is no place name given for where he is from.

Top

The Visitation of Herefordshire 1569

[Source: The Visitation of Herefordshire 1569 Edited by F W Weaver, published 1886. Available from Archive cd Books]

These are the earliest pedigrees for the family that I have found so far. It should be noted that the published edition includes items from sources other than the original Visitation manuscript. Such items have not been included in the following pedigrees, neither have any spouses.

The Welsh had long been renowned for the importance that they placed on knowing their ancestry so it is not surprising that the family were able to list so many generations, once they were notable enough to be recorded in the Visitation. Evidence can be found for the existence of several of the people named here, some of which will be summarised below, and dealt with in detail on the main pedigree discussion page.

However, that does not mean that all of the links between such people are correct. It is interesting that the p3 pedigree should give the children of Henry Myle (Henry Mylde Aphenry in p5), whereas the p5 pedigree makes no mention of them, despite the pedigree apparently being supplied by a closer relation. Amongst such children was Blanch Parry, one of the maidservants to Queen Elizabeth I. One might have expected such a court connection to be noted.

It is also interesting that the p3 pedigree makes no mention of a John as a son of Myles.

These points, along with the problems already mentioned with regard to the "John, Stephen, John" sequence as descendants of Myles on p5, suggest that perhaps the details of the pedigree were not actually well known within the family.

A final point to note is the first use of the house names (of Paston, and of Morhampton) with regard to the George, Stephen and John.

Top

Heraldic Visitations of Wales and Part of the Marches, between the years 1586 and 1613

[Source Heraldic Visitations of Wales and Part of the Marches, between the years 1586 and 1613 compiled by Lewis Dwnn, transcribed and edited by Sir Samuel Rush Meyrick. Published 1846.]
[Note: July 2004 - There is a possibility that Bridge Books, Wrexham LL12 7AW, will produce a facsimile reprint later this year. Tel: 01978-358661 Fax: 01978-262377.]

But where has all this come from? And why are there no details of the family themselves, or how they connect back to the Moreiddig?

Another point to note is that the Parrys are just described as of Poston - there is no mention of the branch at Morhampton. Perhaps this gives a clue as to the possible source of the information.

Top

Llyfr Baglan or The Book of Baglan

[Source Llyfr Baglan or The Book of Baglan compiled between the years 1600 and 1607 by John Williams, transcribed and edited by Joseph Bradney. Published 1910.]

Although individual members of the family appear elsewhere in this book and will be mentioned in the main discussion, the quoted references are those specifically identified, by their titles, as relating to the family. It is assumed that a member of the family supplied the information for them. Spellings and abbreviations have been left as in Bradney's text. Highlighted text concerns the start of the family line, but the full details for most of the entries has been given since it often clarifies or adds to the initial statement.

It is interesting to note how the lines of the wives are often given, especially where there is a connection through them to "important" people. This is a point which will be returned to in the discussion below.

Summary of Llyfr Baglan entries
As can be seen from the above, it is impossible to find a consistent pattern to the entries in Llyfr Baglan. 'Ap' is not always included and sometimes the repetition of a name could be taken either as an additional person, or as the "surname" for one entry, prior to the name being repeated as the first name for the next generation back. The inclusion of the alias also complicates the sequence - as far as I am aware, the term 'ddey relates to Harry ap Griffith (ie Griffith's son, Harry). But by including it after "Griffith apparrie" in p72, the implication is that it is Griffith's father, also named Harry, who is called "black". However, it could be that p72 was supposed to read in the same way as p75, where "Harrie ap gru'" is alias Harry the Black and, although no Harry is then shown as Griffith's father, the listing of the wife of Harry ap John indicates he should be there.

The following is my interpretation of the above entries, in a form that, I hope, makes them easier to compare. To some extent, the interpretation is based on a "best fit" across all of the entries, as well as comparing them to the pedigrees from other sources. Perhaps not a truly valid research method, but the best I can do at the moment, on my experience!

[Some notes concerning the image appear below it]
Notes on the image
Most of the names have been 'anglicised', as have the two nicknames "ddey", which means "black", and "goz'" (or "goch" and "goigh"), which means "red".
The red squares highlight "additional" names on some versions, as well as the 'black' alias, which seems unclear as to whom it should be applied.
The arrows indicate where a 'surname' was given, which was from the father's first name.
The green entries are for the different family line - it should be remembered that, according to the other sources with regard to this line, there should be John ap Harry (reputedly Griffith's brother) between the Richard and the Henry.

The different information given for the parentage of Griffith ap Harry's wife will be dealt with on the main discussion page, as will the difference in Jane Stradling's father's name.

One point to note is that, in every case where Moriddig's parentage is given, he is the son of a Trimbenog, or of another Moriddig who is the son of a Trimbenog. In none of the entries is Moriddig shown as the son of Eidio Wyllt. These accounts therefore contradict that of Dwnn.

Top

The Visitation of Herefordshire 1634

[Source: The Visitation of Herefordshire 1634 transcribed & edited by M P Siddons, Harleian Society Publication]

There are four Parry pedigrees in this book. However, one of them, Parry of Michaelchurch, relates to a different family (the descendants of Gwion Benarw).

Top

The Golden Grove Book - volume 2

[Source: The Gathering the Jewels website, (search for "Idio Wylht". The relevant pages are pp 1 & 13 of his pedigree, images 40 & 52 respectively)].

Although this source is available to anyone who can access my web pages, I have transcribed the details here to make them easier to compare to the other items on this page. The two pages should also be available from the links below - If, for some reason, they aren't, then follow the instructions above for searching the Gathering the Jewels site.
Page 1, image 40 showing from Alured, king of Kyrian in Ireland to Moreydhig.
Page 13, image 52 showing the continuation R:p:13 Moreydhig to James and Philip Parry

NOTE - you will need to use the 'Back' button on your browser to return to this page.
Top

The History of Breconshire

[Source: A History of the County of Brecknock Jones & Bailey (Glanusk edition) Published in four volumes between 1909-1930. This book is also available from Archive cd Books]
Top

Welsh Genealogies

[Source: Welsh Genealogies AD 300-1400, 8 Vols. Cardiff, 1974, microfiche ed 1980, and Welsh Genealogies AD 1400-1500 18 Vols, Aberystwyth, 1983, both by Peter Bartrum]

I have, so far, been unable to obtain copies of the details of the family from these works. However, I hope to do so at some time in the future.

Top

Further Discussion Points

Initial thoughts

Over the years, I think there have been many comments made with regard to the value of Welsh Pedigrees. However, for most of us modern "hobby genealogists", a full examination of the subject is beyond our experience, even when we are striving to achieve a good standard in our research. Unfortunately, this can lead to an uncritical acceptance of published pedigrees relating to the early years. Such acceptance is often "justified" by reference to "the bardic tradition", and by quoting people such as Gerald of Wales. In 1194, Gerald wrote, with regard to the Welsh, that, "Even the common people retain their genealogy, and can not only readily recount the names of their grandfathers and great-grandfathers, but even refer back to the sixth or seventh generation, or beyond them". [2]

It is clear that the Welsh have long been recognised as a people who know their ancestry. But was such ancestry recorded and is it what has been passed down to us? When I read of the "illustrious descent" of the Parrys from the kings of Ireland, am I reading a true account, having its origin in the mists of time, or might it be better described as a "myth of time"!

Many of the pedigrees that exist today are actually the products of a process that has taken place over several centuries. Such a process can be seen in the sources quoted here, where the pedigree clearly develops through the years. Whilst one would expect additions to a pedigree as new generations are born, the interesting feature here is the "backward" development which also occurs.

From just a couple of isolated names in 1480 and 1531, we are presented, in 1569, with two pedigrees that both connect to a common ancestor and contain up to eight generations, several of which are prior to the people mentioned in the earliest sources.

Then, around 1600, we have two, seemingly contradictory, accounts. Firstly there is Dwnn's claim, without details, that the Parrys of Poston descend from Moreiddig, the son of Eidio Wyllt, and from him back to the kings of Ireland. But then there is the second account, in Llyfr Baglan, which supplies, in great detail, the generations back from the previously known "common ancestor", Henry ap John, to a Moreiddig, but this time he is the son of Trimbennog.

By the Visitation of 1634, however, much of the detail has been lost. Two out of three pedigrees clearly overlap but one of them no longer includes even as far back as Henry ap John, whilst the other only gives Henry's father, instead of all of the generations to Moreiddig. The third pedigree stands alone with no apparent connection to the others.

The Golden Grove pedigree, produced around 1765, picks up on the earlier information from Lewis Dwnn. But this time it details not just the ancestors of Eidio Wyllt, but also how the Poston and Llandevailog line is connected to him.

This is also the first time that the marriage of Moreiddig to Catherine, widow of Thomas, Lord Lacy, is mentioned.

Finally, in the early 1800s, Theophilus Jones repeats the Golden Grove information, and makes connections from some of the later generations to people who were alive in his own day (although, interestingly, not from the final generation of the Golden Grove tree). Jones also adds back in what was probably the most "well known" branch of the descendants of Griffith ap Harry, (that which included Blanch, maidservant to the Queen, and her siblings, ending with her nieces, the Newcourt heirs) which had been "lost" from the 1634 Visitation. But he fails to include anything relating to the "John, Stephen, John," sequence which had proved so problematic in the earlier sources.

In order to find a possible explanation for this process taking place, it is necessary to consider the general context in which the sources were produced, as well as specifically who produced them and why. Two other issues deserve mention beforehand. Firstly some comments with regard to the process of production of the sources and then secondly, the geographical position of the Golden Valley.

Since I realise that not everyone will wish to read all of this (which was written as much to help me work out what could have happened, as opposed to being specifically written for other researchers), each section of the discussion is linked to from here:-

[Note - where page numbers are shown in square brackets, i.e. [pXX], these refer to the article by Francis Jones, [3]. Other sources are indicated by links.]

Top
Discussion Menu

The production of the sources

All of the sources quoted were published many years after their original compilation. Thus it is possible for errors to have occurred, not just in the initial collection and recording of the information, but also in the process of transcription. I have been unable to examine the original manuscripts but Francis Jones comments on the "pretty frightening" results that he found when he compared Samuel Meyrick's printed copy of Lewis Dwnn's Visitations with the original manuscript. [p376] It appears that, of all the pedigrees examined, not one had been transcribed accurately!

In some cases, the errors were quite serious - whole generations had been missed out, sons had been made into brothers, place names mis-transcribed, and even one place name which had been made into the name of a son.

Transcription of hand-written documents is often difficult, especially when it takes place some years after the original recording. Not only have spelling and handwriting styles changed, but abbreviations may no longer be obvious (especially if the scribe used his own versions), and the originator's intentions with regard to any notes he'd added might be unclear. For pedigrees, the various styles of layout, names isolated from a context which might have aided their interpretation, and the complications of linkages where cousins intermarry, (a common feature of Welsh families), can all exasperate these difficulties.

Much will depend on the transcriber's experience and prior knowledge, but this in itself can cause additional problems if a difficulty in interpretation of an unclear entry then leads to incorrect assumptions being made because of the presumed "knowledge". Again Francis Jones mentions incorrect words being supplied in place of those that were unclear or missing in Dwnn's work. [p376/7] It is perhaps also important to note that Meyrick's publication of Dwnn's work took place after Jones had published his History of Breconshire, so any additions by Meyrick could have been influenced by such, technically "later", works.

As has already been noted with regard to the 1569 Visitation, the published works do contain information derived from other sources. However, additions were sometimes made to the original manuscripts themselves, whilst they were in the hands of later owners. Where these are identified, editors usually highlight them as being in a different hand. But failure to identify such items would result in the information being presented as if it was part of the original compilation. Careful examination of the original documents by those experienced in handwriting analysis might be necessary in order to identify any such items.

Top
Discussion Menu

The Position of the Golden Valley

The styles of old English and Welsh pedigrees are very different. It would be easy when considering a name such as Parry, which clearly has a Welsh derivation, to think just in terms of "Welsh" pedigrees. Indeed, one of the main sources from which the context information below is derived, is a consideration of Welsh genealogy. However, the position of the Golden Valley should be born in mind since it would probably have introduced a more English outlook to this Parry family.

For those wondering where the valley is, use this link to the Streetmap site for more a modern map. (Sorry about any adverts!).

As can be seen, the Golden valley is now in Herefordshire, near to the border with Wales. However, the position of the border (and even its existence) has not been consistent over the years. Following the Roman occupation and then subsequent withdrawal, the invasions of the Anglo-Saxons resulted in the British concentration within Wales and other western areas. It was about 780 A.D., during the Saxon times, that Offa's dyke was built in order to provide some form of boundary between the two peoples.

The dyke ran south from Shropshire, meeting the river Wye about five miles west of Hereford and, initially, the river was then the boundary for the southern region, [4]. Much of the south west of what is now Herefordshire was therefore in Wales. However, the border was far from peaceful and by King Harold's time it had been pushed back nearer to the modern line. The Normans followed the Saxons and the turbulent history of the area is reflected in the high number of castles found in western Herefordshire.

Referring to events by a name, as in "The Norman Conquest" sometimes gives the impression that such events resulted in instant changes. One needs to remember that, after the initial battle of 1066, there was a gradual process of establishing Norman control throughout the rest of the country. This was particularly true of the border area where, in response to local rebellions, King William set up the Welsh Marches to provide a means of protection for the rest of England, as well as advancing the subjugation of the Welsh.

The Marches were independent kingdoms that the individual lords ruled in their own way, rather than conforming to English Law. Whatever land they could hold was theirs. Even when much of Wales further to the west came under English rule, the Marcher Lords held out for their own separate rights, and the subsequent disagreements between the Marcher lords themselves, and between them and the king, caused many problems.

In fact, some of the early "wars" were really the result of disagreements between such individuals. The rebellion of Owyn Glyndwr, at the start of the fifteenth century, which rapidly embroiled much of Wales and England, had started as a complaint against his neighbour, Reginald de Grey the Lord of Ruthin, who had stolen some common land. Several battles of that war took place near the Golden Valley and it is probable that Owen ended his days in the vicinity, since two of his daughters had married into Herefordshire families.

The later wars, such as those between the Yorkists and Lancastrians in the Wars of the Roses, and between the King and parliament in the Civil Wars, also had an impact on the Golden Valley area. The various factions held land locally, from which the manpower for their armies was raised. In some cases it is possible to identify members of the Parry family supporting particular sides.

However, it is not always easy to work out how families were affected by such events. Intermarriages between the Welsh and English people had taken place, despite legal consequences at times. This meant that many families in the area were related to each other, but even those alliances are no predictor of attitude and, on occasions, members of the same family ended up fighting on opposite sides. [5]

Thus it can be seen that the close involvement with the activities shaping the rest of the country would probably have had more affect on the attitudes of those in the area, rather than an individual's viewpoint being specifically "Welsh" or "English".

Top
Discussion Menu

The Historical Context of the sources

Francis Jones, in his article discussing the origins and development of Welsh genealogy, presents an historical overview of the production of Welsh pedigrees and it would perhaps be helpful if I summarize some of the characteristics he gives for each age. This will help to establish the context in which the quoted sources were produced.

It important to note that I am not an historian, neither am I an expert in the early Welsh manuscripts. This section, therefore, is only a very basic consideration of the issues, and will be subject to additions and amendments as I learn more. Francis Jones's article is more concerned with the methods that can be used to study Welsh genealogy rather than the accuracy of the work itself. It is therefore quite possible that my interpretation of some of these issues is incorrect, or that there are other issues I have not considered. Please contact me if you have any comments or feel that what I have said is in error.

Although there is obviously overlap between the activities in these periods, Francis Jones describes the development of Welsh genealogy within the following timescales:

Within each section he describes the main individuals involved in producing pedigrees, as well as the characteristics and influences on the work, which are of more relevance here.

Early - 1282
None of the sources I have quoted originate in this earliest period. However, the foundation of the "conventional style" of the later pedigrees was established during this time. Separating out what is conventional in the pedigrees, as opposed to what is factual, is a difficult task, so some of the features of the style are worth mentioning here.

It is important to note that the early Welsh literature actually contains very little genealogy. There is evidence that the early British rulers, such as Caracticus in AD 52, had seen themselves as descended from illustrious ancestors. But Francis Jones points out that this is a characteristic of many early peoples, rather than a specific feature of the Welsh. [p314]

The laws of Howell dda in the tenth century do indicate that Welsh society was tribal, and that rights and privileges were established on the basis of blood relationships. This would have meant that it was essential for pedigrees to be kept, since they were likely to be used in legal cases. Such legal testing would have also opened up the pedigrees to public scrutiny and therefore should have ensured their accuracy. It seems reasonable to assume that people within a specific local area would have known the relationships between each other.

The statement of Gerald from the twelfth century, quoted above, confirms the importance placed on knowing and being able to recite ones genealogy. But how was such knowledge transmitted beyond the verbal recitation mentioned by Gerald? Especially since, according to Francis Jones, no written pedigrees survive for the "common people" prior to 1282. [p319]

The work of the bards, whose role it was to write and perform poems, is sometimes cited as the means by which Welsh pedigrees were maintained. The position of the bard was an important one and only specific people were entitled to it. Initially the dynastic families supported them and their poetry therefore reflects this, describing the heroic acts of the rulers. The bards had certain responsibilities such as reciting a poem before a battle, and they also produced work of a religious, and perhaps prophetic, nature. This was a time of great literature and the bards were effectively responsible for creating much of the "history" of the Welsh people, and for using it to encourage them and, at times, stir them to action. However, it was the stories of the rulers, and their battles, which was the "backbone" to this history, rather than it being a history of the "people".

But there is no actual genealogy included in the poems from this time, not even for the rulers. The poems of the fifth and sixth centuries usually only reveal two generations through the names used. [p320, & p334]. Near the end of this early period the Welsh bards were using three names for people but genealogy was still not a feature in their poems. In this the Welsh were different from the Irish tradition, which had a strong genealogical content from about the fifth century to the seventeenth century. [p334]

Although it does appear, from reference to them in other sources, that the bards had possessed some written records relating to their rulers, these have not survived. The only pedigrees that do exist from this time are those that the Anglo Saxon clerics and historians produced and these, as might be expected, relate to the "royal", and "saintly" families, not to the "common people".

Many of the characteristics that are found in the later pedigrees can be traced to the influence of these histories written by the clerics. For example, in the Historia Brittonum which was written in the early seventh century, the Welsh are traced from Brutus and through him back to the Romans and the Greeks. This tracing of descent from a conqueror, rather than from an indigenous race is a common feature of many later pedigrees. This could have been to "set apart" the rulers, distinguishing them from their subjects and establishing their right to rule. For the Welsh, there might also have been a desire to be associated with the race which had previously ruled the land, in the face of the more recent invasions by the Anglo-saxons.

The ancestors were usually shown to be noble or pre-eminent in some way. As in the case with regard to conquerors, having such ancestors would initially have played a part in establishing a ruler's right to rule, but this tendency for pedigrees to be traced to illustrious ancestors continues in later genealogical work.

Another feature is the tracing of descent back to Adam (again, this occurs in the pedigrees of other nationalities as well). Within Welsh genealogy, it was continued until Stuart times, i.e. the seventeenth century. The reason for its occurrence is that, in order to produce histories that 'made sense' and fitted a timescale they knew, the clerics used biblical pedigrees to "fill in the blanks" prior to the Romans. Thus the form of the earliest Welsh pedigrees is to trace the people alive at that time back to native British, and then from the British back to the Romans. Finally from the Romans the pedigrees trace back to Adam, based on the biblical descents.

Within this style certain people became "indispensable ancestors", i.e. key individuals that one needed to connect to, in order to then have a direct line back to some earlier point.

It was the involvement of the clerics as the keepers of the written records that also resulted in the production of the pedigrees for the saints. By then incorporating these, as well as other scriptural individuals, into the pedigrees of the Welsh rulers, they aided the acceptance of the church by the local population. It would probably also help to ensure that the local rulers would grant benefits to the church. Francis Jones suggests that this association between the saints and the ruling families could have been a policy of the church, although it might also be a reflection of the ancient practice of members of families acting as priests. [p314]

Most of the pedigrees are written in narrative form, i.e. a list of names in a sentence, although there is some use of a "catalogue form", where names are listed in a column. An example of this is Harl. MS. 3859, which was written about 1100 and contains a copy of Historia Brittonum and also Annales Cambriae. These "historical works" are followed by pedigrees relating to the Welsh dynastic families that, according to Francis Jones, have been included to "explain" the histories. [p325]

As well as the features already mentioned, these pedigrees show how recourse was sometimes made to the female lines. This was not because the male ancestry was unknown, but either because the female lines enabled the subject to be traced back to a more illustrious ancestor than the male line would, or because the scribe wished to make a connection to a specific ancestor. Francis Jones also shows how comparison of these pedigrees with other sources highlights another situation which sometimes occurred, where an earlier genealogy was abandoned in favour of one produced later which gave a better descent. [p327]

It is interesting to note that these early works contain no evidence of the "tribes" of Wales, which were to become relevant to many people later. [p336]

From these few points then, it can be seen that the existing Welsh literature, and the pedigrees produced from it, is largely of a legendary or mythological nature. The stories may contain traces of "old memories", such as in the use of Roman or ancient British names, or in the opponents for the battles, but many of the details are not accurate. Some of the early writers themselves noted inconsistencies between the various accounts.

However, their presentation as "facts", in stories such as those of Geoffrey of Monmouth, was influential in developing the Welsh people's view of themselves.

Francis Jones does mention several people who said that, where they had been able to test the early Welsh pedigrees, they had generally found them to be accurate. This is the result we would expect, given the Welsh legal system. However it is necessary to know exactly what people tested before assuming that this is justification for accepting all early pedigrees (especially since there are so few surviving "early" pedigrees). There is obviously a difference between early pedigrees that were produced at the time and pedigrees produced at some later date but which relate to people supposedly living in this time.

As already mentioned, no pedigrees survive for the "common man" prior to 1282. There are books in which early church charters are recorded and these do name some contemporary people. However, in the two that I have seen in published form, [6] any genealogy can only be derived from mention of two related people in a land transaction, e.g. a father and his son both being involved in the same event. Evidence of the existence of individuals in such situations cannot, by itself, be used to justify acceptance of pedigrees containing many further generations.

There is also the fact that, even if such early pedigrees are generally accurate, that does not mean that they are of relevance to the Parry family specifically. The church records mainly relate to those who had dealings with the church and would therefore only cover a limited proportion of the population, so any connection to the Parry family would need proving as well. My impression is that there would have been many people for whom no record exists.

1282-1450
During this period the Normans were bringing more areas of Wales under their control, with the resultant changes to governmental systems etc. The year 1282 saw the death of Llywelyn ap Gruffydd, the last of the Welsh princes, and, in 1284, the Statute of Rhuddlan established certain counties in Wales, although the Marcher Lordships remained along the border area.

The main impact was on the Welsh dynastic families who eventually lost their power, but the other Welsh noblemen do not seem to have suffered so greatly. This is perhaps because, through intermarriages, links were being made between the two nations. Francis Jones describes the idea that the Welsh and English were "exclusive", and did not intermarry, as a "modern myth". [p338] Intermarriages took place as a matter of policy between the ruling families, and are especially noticeable in the pedigrees of those in South Wales. The Statute of Rhuddlan in 1284 had established a woman's right to inherit land in the absence of any male heirs, so this would have enabled the Normans to acquire land in Wales through intermarriage with such heiresses, rather than by conquest. Having obtained such land though, the families sought to hold on to it and therefore the marriage of cousins and other related persons continued to be common in Wales.

But the intermarriages would have still led to a wider outlook and also more involvement with English affairs. The influence did work both ways and some of the Norman families, whose origins were in France, actually took on the Welsh language and some of the Welsh habits, such as in the naming patterns. Amongst the families listed by Francis Jones are some whose names appear in the Parry pedigrees, such as the Turbervilles, Stradlings, and Garnons. [p337]

With the reduction in power of the old Welsh rulers who had sustained them, the social position of the bards began to deteriorate. However, many found shelter in the religious houses which were being established during this time, as well as some support from the remaining classes of Welsh nobility. The close involvement between the clerics and the bards continued the fiction of biblical descents.

However, the majority of the poems of this period still contain little in the way of genealogy. After 1300 some genealogy was beginning to be included but it was only as the fourteenth century ended that a new style of poetry began, which incorporated genealogy and heraldry.

The rebellion of Owen Glyndwr took place in the early 1400s. Mindful of the influence of the bards in having proclaimed Owen as the fulfilment of dreams of a Welsh Ruler, Henry IV brought in laws against the Welsh including one against "the minstrels, bards, rhymers, wasters and other vagabond Welsh", [p342 and 7]. This probably contributed to the decreasing status of the bards.

The attitudes in the Parry family can only be imagined. However, we know that a Griffith ap Harry (possible ancestor of the Parrys) had chosen to fight for Owen and, having been pardoned, he initially lost his lands but later regained them [8]. H T Evans [9] states that Owen's supporters persecuted many of those loyal to the King and some escaped the persecution by entering the War with France. Since John ap Harry (possible ancestor of the Parrys, as brother of Griffith) is thought to have been at Agincourt, could there have been a 'difference of opinion' between him and his brother Griffith?

Whatever happened, it appears that the poet Guto'r Glyn complained that a Harri Ddu of Ewias no longer respected the old ways as his father had done.[p342] Perhaps this was the Harri Ddu, son of Griffith ap Harri, finding his own way of dealing with the consequences of his father's actions, and adopting a more English viewpoint.

The poems of the last fifty years of this period were often directed towards the Welsh soldiers who had come into prominence through the various wars, such as the Herberts. There was now an emphasis on genealogy within the poems and Francis Jones notes one concerning the Welsh ancestry of Edward IV, a forerunner of the work during the Tudor period, which emphasised the Welsh descent of that royal family [p343]. Pedigrees of the mothers continue, sometimes being used to connect the medieval noblemen to the earlier princely families. Welsh names in the records of this time often appear with four names, thus revealing as many generations.

1450-1600
Francis Jones refers to this period as a "Golden Age" of Welsh genealogy, since a great deal of work was produced. However, that in itself generates problems. I have already noted the declining social status of the bards at the start of the fifteenth century. During this period, the social changes started to move the genealogical activity further away from the bardic traditions to that of the English style, with more involvement by the College of Arms, and the gentry.

The Wars of the Roses, and the subsequent accession of the Tudors, brought many Welshmen into prominence in England. Families such as the Herberts and Cecils (both of which were related to the Parrys) became "noble" families and many others entered into more minor positions in royal service.

There had been some redistribution of lands because of the Wars, and the later dissolution of the monasteries, which was started in 1538 by Henry VIII, enabled more of those who had profited over the years to acquire lands and become the new gentry. The Act of Union, between 1536 and 1543, removed the Marcher Lordships, bringing that area under the same judiciary system as England and western Wales, and dividing it into shires. Ewias Lacy, which was part of the Marches and was the area alongside the Golden Valley, was incorporated into Herefordshire.

The Act changed the system of land tenure so that the English system of primogenitor replaced the Welsh system of gavelkind. This meant that, whereas land used to be divided between all of the sons when the father died, it now passed to the eldest son. This resulted in many younger sons being "disinherited" and needing to find other ways of supporting themselves.

The Act also had an affect on naming, in that it required official records to be in English so names were recorded in their anglicised form. Fixed surnames became more common, although siblings did not always take the same surname. It should also be noted that some areas of Wales retained the patronymic system for many years. Certainly my own research amongst the Will abstracts of the seventeenth century indicates that some families in the Brecon Diocese of St Davids, which covered the SW corner of Herefordshire, were still using the patronymic system at that time.

However, even where the patronymic system was maintained, the adoption of English and Biblical names as forenames, instead of the older traditional ones, resulted in a limited range of names. This makes the identification of people, by name alone, very difficult.

The Welsh and English traditions with regard to genealogy appear to influence each other during this period. The English Visitations, which initially had been purely armorial, began to incorporate pedigrees, and coats of arms were recorded in some Welsh manuscripts. One of the most prolific Welsh bards was a deputy herald for Wales [p366], indicating the growing acceptance of the authority of the College of Arms. It appears that many Welsh families registered their pedigrees with the College and involvement with "English" battles, such as Agincourt, was recorded, whereas those who fought with Owen Glyndwr were not mentioned. [p363]

The genealogists of this time created many new works, as well as copying the older manuscripts. The conventions of the earlier works were maintained, but new features, such as numerical groupings, were starting to appear (although the earliest occurrences seem to refer to only three royal tribes, not the later five).

Henry VII, the first Tudor king, was interested in genealogy, [p349] and much of the work produced during this time emphasised the right of the Tudors to rule, based on descent from Welsh Kings. It was around 1500 that the first occurrences appear of the "tribe of the Marches" and Tudor Trefor [p354]. The subject of the tribes of Wales seems to have caused some problems and Francis Jones refers to those who "solved" the problems as "writers whose imagination was in excess of their honesty." [p372]

It was also in this period that Arms were assigned to ancestors.

It appears that many of the newer gentry were keen to "prove" their descent from distinguished ancestors, which obviously encouraged the forging of pedigrees. Although, in the early pedigrees, forgery was unlikely to be a problem because of their nature as 'public property' in the legal processes, the changes in society resulted in a lowering of standards by some bards. [p371/2] Fabrication of pedigrees in return for support did take place, one of the main methods being to "hook onto" an older, well-established, family. This was something that would be fairly easy to do, given the frequent occurrence of identical names in Wales, along with the movement of people away from their 'home' areas where their history was known. Even some of the Heralds from the College of Arms have been shown to have forged pedigrees. [p373]

By the end of this period, the bardic genealogical activity is largely over. Now the main activists were the country gentlemen for whom genealogy and heraldry were their hobbies. Although they maintained the conventions such as tracing descents back to legendary and biblical characters, and recording the pedigrees of mothers, they worked to the English style, being associated with the College of Arms. Their knowledge of history and legal documents enabled them to lay the foundation of modern genealogical research. However, although there is much work of value, Francis Jones notes how certain of them were not averse to fabricating descents. [p381]

Seventeenth Century
Once again the social, economic and political factors produced a changing situation. The Tudor period had passed and now the Stuarts were the ruling family. Religious tensions led some to emigrate to the new lands opening up in places such as America. The disagreements between the king and parliament eventually led to the Civil Wars and the period of the Commonwealth, before the restoration on the monarchy in 1660. There was also a continued rise of 'new' people to positions of prominence through commercial ventures. However, in some cases these were the younger sons of 'old' families who had remade their fortunes through trade and who therefore, quite legitimately, could claim descent from older families.

There were still some bards but the majority of genealogical work was carried out by the county gentleman and by official genealogists. The country squires continued to collect pedigrees as a hobby, some of them amassing sizeable libraries of old manuscripts. It is not surprising that some families developed "hereditary genealogical tendencies"! [p375]. There is evidence to show that these gentlemen were corresponding with each other and exchanging information with regard to the pedigrees. Many of the earlier manuscripts were being copied either by, or for, them, as well as new work being produced. However, according to Francis Jones, the pedigrees of the seventeenth century do require even greater care in their use than the earlier ones, especially where Englishmen have copied or "translated" earlier Welsh manuscripts. [p397]

The continued adoption of surnames led to many claims of descent from illustrious "ancestors" purely on the basis of having the same name. There is still evidence of the production of fraudulent pedigrees, and now even claims of descent from fairies! [p400/401]

After 1700
The considerable social and economic changes of both the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries continued to impact on genealogy. Those who'd made their money through industry now became part of the "landed gentry". Their interest in antiquarian pursuits was responsible for preserving much of the older work since, although little original work was being carried out in the eighteenth century, there was much copying of previous records [p434].

Francis Jones describes the nineteenth century as the "great age of the family history", [p447], as an enthusiasm for things past was inspired by literary works, such as those of Sir Walter Scott. This was also the period when works such as Lewis Dwnn's Heraldic Visitations were made available to a wider public through their publication by Meyrick. County histories and other books of antiquities were published and many "family traditions" became established.

Often the gentry wanted pedigrees to fit their new status and there was an increase in genealogical publications. However, in contrast to the efforts of some who did try to treat genealogy as a science, the publication of works such as Burke's Landed Gentry and Peerage continued to encourage unjustified claims. As Francis Jones puts it "not even the maddest Welsh pedigree can produce anything to compare with some of the statements that appeared in the pages of those curious volumes". [p447/8]

Apart from Bartrum's work, which I will be including once I have the details because it is widely regarded as an authoritative work, the most recently originated source I have reported here is Theophilus Jones's History of Breconshire, which was first printed at the start of nineteenth century. Although others have written about the Parry family since, they have usually repeated the account of the descent from Idio Wyllt and the kings of Ireland. Little serious research into the origins of the family appears to have been carried out.

In fact, several specific comments by Francis Jones indicate that some of the Parry descendants were closely connected to those engaged in genealogical pursuits and, dare I say it, likely to have "pretensions" of grandeur.

Descendant genealogists - the de Winton Connection
When referring to the rise, as a result of the industrial revolution, of the "new rich", who set themselves up as country gentleman, and who then wanted the ancestry to match, Francis Jones makes specific mention of a Mr Wilkins who changed his name to that of his "ancestor" de Winton [p313]. Although he does not give further details, other references to this can be found fairly easily:

Powys archives give some information on the family, including the fact that "Walter Wilkins MP (1809 - 1840) was the one who resumed, by Royal Licence, the ancient surname of de Winton, on 6 July 1839."

Pedigrees for the family also appear in Theophilus Jones's History of Breconshire - in volume 2, p 155/6, the family is shown under the name of Wilkins, but in Volume 4, p 47, a later summary of one branch has them under the name of De Winton. Interestingly, it is not the immediate line of the Walter Wilkins who applied for the Royal Licence, but rather the descent from Jeffrey Wilkins, brother of Walter's grandfather, another Walter.

It appears that the family had started to use the de Winton surname prior to the application for the royal licence. Two paintings, referred to as "portrait of Master de Winton and portrait of his wife Catherine Parry", which were being sold in 1996, are described in the second item of an archived news release from the Department of National Heritage. (Click here for details). Painted in 1765, they are believed to portray Jeffrey Wilkins and his wife, Catherine Parry.

Catherine Parry was one of the descendants of the Parry family from Llandevailog Tre-Graig, who were descended from the Poston family.

One wonders what society in general made of this change of surname. Perhaps the "old" gentry viewed it with some amusement. It was certainly an event well enough known for Elizabeth Gaskell to have used it in her novel "A Dark Night's Work" (available online through various sites, such as the Gutenberg Project).

From both the Powys Archives site, and from the detail relating to the portraits, the manner in which the Wilkins family had gained their fortune, in India and through banking, is evident. One should bear in mind the possibility that this could be an example of a younger son from an old family making good. However, if I have correctly identified the references, it does appear that the Rev. Thomas Wilkins, great grandfather to the brothers, Walter and Jeffrey, was one of the early antiquarians. He was responsible for copying some of Rees Meyrick's Morganiae Archaiographia [10], as well as being one of the seventeenth century "squire genealogists" listed by Francis Jones. [p405] At some time he was also the holder of the original manuscript for Llyfr Baglan, [11] (although his family do not appear in that book).

It would be interesting to see how well the early stages of the Wilkins pedigree in the History of Breconshire stand up to close scrutiny.

Descendant genealogists - the Wood connection
Another person mentioned by Francis Jones is H. J. T. Wood, who he refers to as one of the "champions" of Welsh Pedigrees. Several items of Wood's work can be found in the LDS catalogue ("Calendar of Plea Rolls of the county of Cardigan 1541-1609", "An index to Brecknockshire Wills", "Pedigrees", "Welsh Pedigrees from English Visitations, A.D. 1530-1666").

Francis Jones seems to class Wood amongst those "Englishmen who, possessing a sound knowledge of English history, were sadly lacking in knowledge of the Welsh background." Based on an article of Wood's written in The Ancestor, he describes him as one who "had fallen in love with his subject" (that being "The Value of Welsh Pedigrees") and proceeds to point out some of Wood's statements which are contradicted by evidence. It appears from the quotes, that Wood was well versed with the Golden Grove manuscripts, although I found no trace of a pedigree specifically for Idio Wyllt and the Parrys when I looked through the two pedigree items of Wood's that have been filmed by the LDS.

So where is the connection to the Parrys? In Wood's work there is part of the pedigree for the Jones-Parry family of Madryn and Llwyn on (another family that underwent several name changes by Royal Licence). The final entry is for Ellen Beatrice Jones Parry - who just happened to be Wood's wife!

The pedigree for the Jones-Parry family also appears in Burke's Landed Gentry [12] and in both that and Wood's work, they are shown as descended from Tudor Trevor in the paternal line, (Jones). I have already noted that the first mention of Tudor Trefor was in 1500, after the Tudor rise to power. The Parry family is only traced back to Geoffrey Parry, and his son Love Parry, High Sheriff of Caernarvonshire in 1685. Given all the detail that appears for the Jones line, this does seem strange, especially since this is one of the families that later researchers claim connects to the Golden Valley Parry family [13]. Indeed, the coat of arms shown for the Jones-Parry family in both Burke's and Wood's work is a variation of the Golden Valley arms, being a fess between four lozenges (instead of the three lozenges in the Golden Valley family arms).

I have not yet found evidence of Ellen herself making the claim of descent from the Golden Valley family. However, her own interest in antiquarian works is demonstrated by her republishing of Rowland Vaughan's "Waterworks" book, in 1897, [14]. Rowland Vaughan was a descendant of the Parrys of the Golden valley and the book, originally published in 1610, was a description of his attempts to improve the agriculture in the Golden Valley through a system of irrigation, or "drownings". The introduction to the reprint, written by Ellen, contains some details of the Parry family, although, as will be explained in the discussions of the later generations of the Parry pedigree, certain of her statements are in error.

These two examples are illustrations of the extent to which possible members of the Parry family were, perhaps even more than was common for their times, engaged in genealogical pursuits. There are other examples as well, of those who thought they were descended from the family and who were also engaged in such activity:-

I have seen no evidence, so far, that this next researcher made the claim to be descended from the Golden Valley family. However, he was born in Allington, Wiltshire (as was the above mentioned F C Parry) and, according to a set of pedigrees in Hereford Library, there is a link to the Allington family from those of the Golden Valley. Unfortunately, the papers at the library are only a partial copy of a researcher's work, and I have not yet been able to identify the source, nor where any additional sheets might be.

These later activities obviously complicate the process of research into the family. The frequent repetition of the story that they "descend from Moreiddig who married Catherine, widow of Thomas de Laci" in other sources as well, such as Robinson's Mansions and Manors of Herefordshire (1872) and Strong's The Heraldry of Herefordshire (1848) have lent it an air of permanence and 'truth'.

Hence my emphasis on the need to examine the accounts given in earlier sources, and the processes which appear to have taken place before such an account first appeared.

The above should give readers some idea of the background and context to the sources. So how do all the above factors impact on the sources quoted here?

Top
Discussion Menu

Specific consideration of the Quoted Documents

The Visitations
These were official 'surveys', where the heralds were authorised to examine and report on, the rights of families to bear arms. Descriptions of their value can be found elsewhere (e.g. Chris Philip's Medieval Genealogy site). Those quoted above for 1480, 1530, 1569 and 1634, are the only published ones that I know of for Herefordshire but there is at least one more still in manuscript form, for 1683. [17].

As mentioned above, the earliest Visitations were mainly armorial, that is, very little genealogical information was recorded. This was because the College of Arms instigated them and they therefore follow the English style of the time. The Visitation of Ballard lists names, and details people's arms in blazon, although there are also some painted shields, which might have been added later. Information on land held and the number of sons is given in some cases, but the sons are never named. Fellow's Visitation is also mainly armorial, listing arms found in churches, as well as those held by individuals, but it also includes short pedigrees in narrative form for many of the individuals recorded.

Given the general nature of these two works, I think it would be wrong to assume that the absence of a Parry pedigree means the details of the family were unknown. However, it does seem strange that Miles ap Harry was not included in Ballard's. Miles was married to Jane Stradling, daughter of Sir Henry Stradling of St. Donats. Jane's mother was a daughter of Sir William ap Thomas of Raglan and sister to William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke. Miles was described as an "armiger" in his Will, proved after he died in 1488. One might expect that bearing Arms, along with such family connections, should have been sufficient justification for his inclusion in the Visitation of 1480.

The lack of any specific Parry entry in 1531 is also a concern. The grandson of the Miles ap Harry who died in 1488, also named Miles ap Harry, did not die until 1543 and so was alive at the time of the Visitation. His father had been sheriff of Herefordshire and his sister was Blanch, who later became maidservant to Queen Elizabeth I. His was the line that ended with two heiresses who both married into the Vaughan family. Since Miles was the owner of Newcourt, and can be assumed to have been relatively wealthy in view of his daughters' later inheritance, one might have expected them to be important enough members of the gentry to be included.

The Stephen ap Harry, who appears in the "John, Stephen, John" sequence in 1569, was principal "captain" of Lord Leonard Grey, the Lord Deputy of Ireland in the late 1530s, [18]. Like Myles, one might also have expected Stephen to be of some standing and therefore deserving of mention.

Between 1531 and 1569, there is quite a change in the level of information given. As opposed to the isolated names of the early Visitations, that of 1569 includes two pedigrees, with two lines both being traced back to a common ancestor, Henry ap John, and up to eight generations shown. Several of the generations were also prior to the people mentioned in 1488 and 1530. What could have produced this change?

One possible explanation is that the movement away from the original English style, where Visitations were mainly for armorial purposes, to a style which included more genealogy, allowed such detail to be recorded, the detail itself having been maintained by the family in the traditional Welsh manner.

But could there be other explanations? Especially since over three hundred years had passed between Gerald's comment and the 1569 Visitation. With the English influence in the area, had the Welsh traditions been maintained? I have already mentioned that Harry Ddu was turning his back on them around 1400.

By 1569, the Tudors had ruled for eighty-four years, long enough for the many myths generated in this period to have taken root in people's minds. The Parry family had contacts in the royal court and therefore would have been aware of the contemporary genealogical speculations. Had the possession of a good descent become a feature of people's thinking? If so, it is interesting to note that, at this point, the descent is not particularly "illustrious".

Alternatively, the local Parry families were likely to be in contact with each other - could they have discussed their mutual surname and just developed a scheme that explained it?

We will probably never know but, despite the above possibilities, at the moment there seems to be no obvious reason for totally discounting the information given. There are no claims to a distinguished ancestry, which might have been cause for suspicion of its validity. And the reference to Harry Ddu of Ewyas by the poet Guto'r Glyn implies the family had earlier followed the Welsh traditions, so it is possible that the details of the family had been maintained, even if they adopted a more English viewpoint with regard to other issues.

However the details clearly need confirming, considering there are known problems concerning even the more recent of the generations shown.

By the Visitation of 1634, the "common ancestry" has been lost, with only one family, the senior branch from Poston, now showing the earlier ancestors. But even they only show one generation prior to Henry Jones and so no longer trace back as far as Moreiddig. Why has the earlier information been lost, especially from the Wilmiston branch, who were also descendants of the Poston line? And why did the Dulas family no longer maintain any connection to the Poston line?

Certain factors may have assisted in the maintenance of some information for the senior Poston line. Blanch, one of the sons of James Parry of Poston, was sheriff of Breconshire in 1619. His grandson, James, is said to have married a daughter of the Earl of Pembroke. Such links would indicate their continued involvement with the higher ranks of society, usually those who maintain their heritage.

Siddons also mentions Blanch's brother, Richard, as citing the text of some earlier documents from the fifteenth century, [19] I still need to confirm this but I think there is a mention (somewhere!) of this Richard as having carried out genealogical work. It is not difficult to believe that such connections would encourage the maintenance of the pedigree for this branch.

However, the situation was different for the descendants of Griffith ap Harry, for whom there seems to be very little information by the seventeenth century. There appear to be no men holding positions such as sheriff, or marrying into other, higher status, families. Perhaps the younger sons of the earlier generations had moved away, having no longer received part of the land as their inheritance, and needing to find alternative methods of support. Several of the more senior branches of this line had then ended with daughters. These had either married into other families, thus changing their surnames, or married into other branches of the same family, thus merging the lines. Such factors would contribute to the disappearance of this line of the Parry family.

There are no Arms noted for the "Parrys of Arxton and Dulas" in 1634 so perhaps the herald recorded the family because they were part of the gentry, but did not require an extensive pedigree because there was no need to prove that they had a right to bear Arms. Alternatively, the lack of information might be a sign of a reduction in the importance being placed on maintaining ones ancestry by these branches of the family, especially with the passing of the Tudor dynasty, with whom they had had such close contact.

It will be interesting to see what is recorded for the various branches of the family in the Visitation of 1683.

Lewis Dwnn
In some ways, Lewis Dwnn's work could be dealt with under the Visitations - he became deputy herald for the whole of Wales in 1586, [p376] and was authorised to carry out a visitation by the College of Arms.

However, he was of Welsh descent, "firmly grounded in the old traditions" according to Francis Jones, and also had access to many of the old records held by the gentry. His work shows the transition from the old Welsh style of genealogy to the newer English style, with pedigrees being given in a variety of forms. His English is frequently phonetic which can add to some of the problems in understanding the work and relating items to the correct people. Francis Jones does describe him as a "fine genealogist", and one whose pedigrees have been found to be accurate by those who have tested them. However, he also records the fact that there are internal inconsistencies in the work, (as well as the known mistakes), with the same pedigree sometimes appearing several times but with differences.[p376]

The errors in transcription already commented on should be remembered. Francis Jones also points out that "Lewis Dwnn took every opportunity to magnify his own family's importance" - perhaps an indication of the sort of ancestry he might produce for others as well?

Although Meyrick, who edited the published work, has added notes to clarify some of the items and errors, it is possible that some of his additions are themselves incorrect. For example, he mentions a portrait of "Bishop Parry" which hung at Goodrich Court and which he describes as being Bishop Richard Parry (Bishop of St Asaph). However, his description bears a remarkable similarity to a portrait described by Boden in The Parrys of the Golden Vale which relates to Bishop Henry Parry (Bishop of Gloucester and then Worcester). [Further details with regard to this will appear elsewhere on this site later. Also see [20] below for other information on Meyrick.]

Another of the difficulties with Dwnn's work is that not all areas are included. My impression was that, although there were many pedigrees for the west and north of Wales, there was very little for Monmouthshire, Breconshire and the southern Marches. This is confirmed by M P Siddons in his introduction to the Visitations by the Heralds in Wales, where he describes Dwnn's surviving manuscripts.

The lack of pedigrees specifically for the south east area is obviously a problem. If they had existed, then any information relating to such families which appears in the other sections of the work could be compared to them. As things stand, it is not possible to identify the source of the comment about the Parrys of Poston descending from Moreiddig, son of Eidio Wyllt. Did it come from a connecting family, or from someone in the family who had moved elsewhere? Was it supported by any evidence, or was it just an chance comment, perhaps made on the basis of the occurrence of the same name, Moreiddig, in two different accounts?

The story itself bears several of the hallmarks of the conventional accounts. There is the illustrious descent from the kings of Ireland. Although not exactly descended from a conqueror, Idio is clearly shown to have foreign ancestry. And, through the female lines, Moreiddig is also linked to the Welsh rulers.

My own interpretation of the lack of any specific detail as to how the Parrys of Poston descend from this Moreiddig, is that there was no direct communication with a member of the family who knew the (reputed) full pedigree. Otherwise, I would have expected Dwnn to record the details. It seems plausible that, in the general course of collecting information concerning the gentry, Dwnn had heard of Poston, and perhaps of a story that the Parrys descended from a Moreiddig who had a connection to the Lords of Brecon. In the absence of alternative details, it would be easy to link them to the one Moreiddig that he had a pedigree for, who also had a Brecon connection.

It is interesting to note that the pedigree showing part of the descent for Blanch Parry, the Queen's maidservant, only traces back as far as "Gruffydd ap Harri" of New Court, before following his wife's line back to Gerald Barri. There is no comment about Poston. But perhaps this is because the main descent relates to a Woolphe family, who were descended from another branch of the Barri family. It is possible that the descent to Blanch was only included in the Woolphe pedigree in order to show the "royal" connection and they were therefore not interested in showing any further ancestry of Griffith, rather than such ancestry not being known.

Francis Jones states that Lewis Dwnn and George Owen of Henllys, one of the gentlemen antiquarians, were friends [p380]. From his article and from the introduction to Meyrick's publication of Dwnn's work, as well as Siddons' description of Dwnn's surviving manuscripts, it is clear that Dwnn and Owen shared information and effectively would have copied items from each other's work. Dwnn's foundation might have been in the old traditions, but his magnification of his own family's ancestry, coupled with his involvement with the gentry genealogists who are known to have fabricated their own descent, must surely put the quality of some of his information in doubt.

Llyfr Baglan
Little is known about John Williams, the author of Llyfr Baglan. Francis Jones states that he was from South Wales [p377] but Bradney, who edited the published version, is more specific, suggesting he was from Monmouthshire, most probably the northern area, where it borders on the south west of Herefordshire. This is based on the fact that the focus of attention is on the families in that area.

The work is basically contemporary to Lewis Dwnn's, since Dwnn's was compiled between 1586 and 1613, and Llyfr Baglan between 1600-1607. Many of the pedigrees are in narrative form and include the features from the conventional style, such as showing the descents of mothers, and tracing some lines back to mythological/legendary characters, as well as back to Adam. Like Dwnn, John Williams had made use of earlier records, the main items of which he lists. Works, such as those written by Gerald of Wales near the end of the twelfth century, were printed in latin versions during the Elizabethan era[21], and so were becoming well known. However, according to Francis Jones, no one source predominates in Llyfr Baglan, and many of the pedigrees seem to have been constructed by John Williams himself. [p377]

This leads me to one of the main values of the book, which is that it includes many of the lower gentry in the area - people whose pedigrees are not recorded in any other sources. To obtain such information, it seems reasonable to assume that John Williams must have been in direct contact with most of the families. This is obviously one advantage that it has over Dwnn's very "distant" account of the Parry family.

But how accurate is it?

The book does have a bias, according to Francis Jones, in that it was very influenced by the Herberts and the Cecils, and there is an effort to glorify the Herbert ancestry in particular [p377]. It also emphasises the Welshness of the Tudors. That is probably not surprising, since Elizabeth was on the throne until 1603.

The Herbert and Cecil bias could be important. As already stated, both of these families were related to the Parrys and they both had close connections to the Herefordshire/Monmouthshire border area. The Herberts held Raglan Castle (although, as an illustration of the conflicting interests of the families at times, it was a related Herbert who was responsible for much of the destruction of Raglan Castle, including a library full of old manuscripts, during the civil war [22]). The Cecils were connected with Alterynnis, a property in Walterstone, Herefordshire.

There appears to be some doubt about the ancestry of both families. There is an account in Llyfr Baglan of how the ancestry of William ap Thomas was "investigated" in the 1460s, after which his descendants took the surname Herbert, at the suggestion of the King, [23]. Francis Jones records the efforts of Hugh Thomas, one of the seventeenth century genealogists, to show that the pedigree from the 1460s, which traced the Herberts from the chamberlain of King Henry I, was incorrect and that they should really be traced from Maximus, the British Emperor of Rome! [p426]. With regard to the Cecils, Francis Jones refers to some of them as being "pedigree mad" [p372] and other sources suggest that the account of their ancestry was fictitious, [24].

As well as both families being related to the Parrys, references can be found for members of the Parry family serving under the Herberts, especially during the Wars of the Roses, [25]. With such close contact, attitudes are surely likely to have filtered down, from the king (and later Queen) through their servants, the Herberts and Cecils, to their servants, the Parrys. If, in the mid 1400s, there was already evidence of pedigrees being "researched" in order to produce an illustrious ancestry, by 1600 the importance of having such ancestry was probably a consideration of many of the lower gentry. Not only that, John Williams might have extended his bias towards the Herberts and Cecils to their associates as well, helping them to develop such an ancestry. Could this explain the generations that appear in the pedigree between the Visitation of 1569 and the work of John Williams?

Please note that I am not saying here that the Parrys and other gentry were all busy deliberately forging their pedigrees! (Even though it is known that a few of the gentry did.) But I imagine many of us have family stories that, once investigated, turned out to fall short of factual accuracy, despite the conviction with which they had been passed down. And we probably all know of people who find a "match" in something such as the IGI and assume that it therefore must be their ancestor. Was it any different in the past?

What passed for "history" by the sixteenth century seems to be the subject of major debate. Suffice it to say that, with works available by authors such as Geoffrey of Monmouth, Polydore Virgil (who criticised Geoffrey's history), Leland, Camden, and Foxe, amongst others, and also the "historical" plays from several authors, there seems to have been plenty of scope for differing views! In such a situation, stories can easily become confused as names, and events, get confounded. But it is quite possible that Llyfr Baglan is a good representation of what the people actually believed about themselves at that time. [33] However that belief involved the extension of the Parry pedigree beyond Henry Jones, the "common ancestor" of 1569, back to Trymbenog.

If such a story was "common knowledge" in the various Parry families of the time, it perhaps goes some way to explaining Lewis Dwnn's comment, since they now have some claims to an illustrious ancestry which could act as a "hook" to connect them to the Irish descent. But this begs the question of why did most of the Parry pedigrees in Llyfr Baglan go back to Moreiddig ap Trymbenog? Can a consideration of this issue shed any light on the contradiction between Llyfr Baglan, and the other accounts where Moreiddig is recorded as the son of Idio Wyllt?

I believe it can.

Page 89 of Llyfr Baglan does have a pedigree showing Idio Wyllt which is as follows:
"Geraid, lord of Kenarth, was created Earle of Desmont in the tyme of Kinge Henrie the first, A'oq' d'ni 1102; he ma. Neast, da. to Rees ap tewdor, king of South Wales.
Hee beareth Ermynes, a salter Crosse gules. She beareth or, a schochion gules engrailed, a lion or rampant.
Ideo Willt, the sone of Gerard, lo. of Trercastell in llywell, ma. Elinor, da. to Drym benoc, lo. of Brecon. Hee beareth A., a lion S. rampant. Shee beareth S., a Cepheron A., 3 speares heds A., languid.
This said Ideo Willt was ane Irishman and came out of Irland with his Uncle Gru' ap Rees ap Tewdor and was Created lo. of llywell, and he buylded the Castle there A'o d'ni 1108. This Ideo, lo. of llywell, and Elinor his wif had issue Bowell, the father of Golwg goch, the father of mabron, the fathere of Gurgenay, the father of Gru', w'ch had issu Kadogan henn & others, of whome the Kadoganes of llangadog Vawre doe descend."

It can be seen that some of the features of this agree with those in the other accounts:
- Idio is from Ireland,
- He becomes Lord of Llywel
- He marries Elinor, daughter of Drymbenog
- He has a son Bowell (which is near enough to the Bywiall/Bywialh of the other versions)

There are then some small differences:
- His mother is Nest, daughter to Rees ap Tewdor. This agrees with Jones's History of Breconshire, but not with Dwnn, where she is the daughter of Tewdwr ap Einion, or the Golden Grove, where she is daughter to Tewdwr Mawr, (both of whom are then indicated to be the father to Rees ap Tewdor).
- He aided his uncle Griffith ap Rees ap Tewdor. This does not agree with Jones (vol 4, page 1), Dwnn, or the Golden Grove, where he aids his uncle Rhys ap Tudor. [Remember, there is a contradiction in Jones between the details given in his account of the family and the relationships he then shows in the pedigree].

There is also the main difference in Idio's father's name - Geraid in Llyfr Baglan, Sutric in the other accounts.

And, of course, there is no mention of a son called Moreiddig to Idio and Elinor.

There is clearly some attempt, in Dwnn, the Golden Grove and in Jones, to relate the Parrys to the Lords of Brecon, through the marriage of Idio to Elinor, daughter of Drymbenog. However, it seems strange that the different versions of the Parry pedigree in Llyfr Baglan all name a Drymbenog/Trimbenog as Moreiddig's father directly - none of them indicate that the connection to Drymbenog could be through a daughter. Although mother's lines were often quoted if they provided a more illustrious ancestry than the father's line, the links do usually seem to have been specified so one might have expected Elinor to have been mentioned in the Parry pedigrees.

It is also interesting to note that the initial portion of the Llyfr Baglan version of the ancestry of Idio bears a remarkable similarity to that nowadays given for the Fitgeralds, descendants of Gerald Fitzwalter of Windsor. He is one of three men by whom Nest, daughter of Rees ap Tudor had children (the others being Henry I, and Stephen, the Castellan of Cardigan). The Fitzgeralds were involved with the invasion of Ireland by the Normans. Thus Idio, if he existed, would actually have had Norman and Welsh ancestry, rather than being a descendant of the Irish Kings. But it should be noted that none of the other accounts of Gerald and Nest give them a son called Idio!

Whilst on the subject of this similarity to the story of the Fitzgeralds, it is also interesting to note that, according to various online sources [26], two sons of Nest, Maurice Fitzgerald and Robert Fitzstephen are reputed to have accompanied Richard De Clare, or "Strongbow" to Ireland. This was to assist Dermot MacMurrough, King of Leinster in regaining his position. The reward for Strongbow, apart from being granted lands in Ireland by Dermot, was to marry Aoife, Dermot's daughter. Aoife is also known as Eva. Note the similarity to "Eva, daughter and heir to Dermot Mackbury, King of Leinster" who appears in the Golden Grove book and in Jones.

Perhaps this whole story would be better regarded as an example of the continuation of the conventional style, a legendary account, where some of the essence of the story is true, but the specific details, along with their application to the Parry family, are unreliable.

Such an explanation might also help to account for the appearance of "Idio", a name that seems uncommon in the Welsh pedigrees. Several sources mention a saxon landowner in the Herefordshire/Shropshire border area, who was called "Edric the Wild", and who joined with the Welsh princes in order to resist the Norman invasions, [27]. Perhaps this is a further example of the confounding of information.

Either way, given that Idio Wyllt does appear in Llyfr Baglan, it seems strange that the Parrys are not linked to him. I would suggest that this is because the Parrys of those times did not believe there to be a connection.

So from whom might the Parrys have believed their Moreiddig to descend from? (An interesting consideration, although probably irrelevant from the point of view of the accuracy of the pedigree!)

It is possible that the "as many doe writ", in the accounts on pages 72 and 75, was to indicate that the ancestry of Moreiddig was so well known that it didn't need repeating. But I think it is perhaps more likely to relate specifically to the marriage of Harry to Agnes Milbourne, the rest of Harry's ancestry being given purely as the Welsh style of identifying him. The Milbourne family were well known, Simon Milbourne having had at least eleven daughters, many of whom married into important families. Thus that marriage would have been mentioned in numerous other sources.

The one Parry account that gives any ancestry for Trymbenog is p87, relating to the Poston family, which derives them from the Lords of Brecon. But it is perhaps worth noting that this is the only family to specifically claim this "illustrious descent". Just as it is the Poston family who has the extended pedigree in the 1634 Visitation, as well as being those named by Dwnn. Did they have a greater tendency to try glorifying their ancestry?

Unfortunately, none of the other pedigrees I have found so far for "Blethyne, sone to maynerch" gives a similar descent through to a Moreiddig.

I do intend to carry out a more detailed investigation of the various occurrences in Llyfr Baglan of the name "Moreiddig", to see if it will shed more light on this subject. However, for now I will just mention that there are several other entries showing a "Moreiddig son of Drymbennog". In most of them, Drymbenog is the son of Maynarch, Lord of Brecon, and the Moreiddig can usually be clearly identified as relating to Moreiddig Warwyn, the ancestor of the Vaughans of Bredwardine. According to Theophilus Jones in his History of Breconshire, the two Moreiddigs are to be distinguished from each other. However, he then proceeds to confuse them himself [compare vol 4, page 1, to vol 1, p58].

Since the Parry family had intermarried with the Vaughans on several occasions, this might have influenced their views. And, although the majority of the Parry accounts do not give any further ancestors, so make no specific claims, I wonder whether, for the Parrys, "Moreiddig ap Trimbennog" was effectively one of those "indispensable" ancestors, who were required in order to claim a good descent. Perhaps, once the connection was made to him, then they had demonstrated their illustrious ancestry and did not need to give further details.

But, to return to the main point of this page, what conclusion can be drawn generally as to the accuracy of Llyfr Baglan?

Clearly the tracing of pedigrees to fantastic origins, such as to Adam or to Brutus, was in the conventional style and can be discounted from being factually accurate. The illustrious ancestry of the Parrys is also dubious, given the bias of the book. There are inconsistencies in the work, such as the way in which some of the Parry pedigrees differ from each other. However, the sheer number of pedigrees for the minor of gentry in the area, along with the level of detail given for them, lead me to conclude that the work was compiled by interviewing representatives of the families, as well as from other records for the older details. In which case, although some of the pedigrees may not be accurate for more than a few generations, I would consider them to be an accurate representation of those alive at the time, as well as of their immediate ancestors.

Golden Grove
In an appendix to his article on Welsh Genealogy, Francis Jones discusses the derivation of the Golden Grove books and shows that they are a partial copy of the Protheroe manuscripts. The Protheroe Manuscripts are a collection of over fifty volumes of pedigrees that eventually came into the hands of Edward Protheroe, who sold them to the College of Arms in 1828. They are the product of a process which originated with George Owen of Henllys (c1553-1613), one of the antiquarian gentlemen of the late sixteenth century, and friend of Lewis Dwnn.

Francis Jones describes Owen's work as possessing "a high degree of accuracy, if we except the forged link between his own genuine Welsh ancestors and the Norman Martins", [p381].

I do wonder how well these two judgements sit alongside each other. Owen was the third generation of his family to be involved with genealogy, his father and grandfather having both made out pedigrees [p375]. He kept open house for the Welsh bards (many of whom, by this date, Francis Jones has dismissed as "an uneducated lot of inferior status", [p373]). One of Owen's objectives was to prove he was a descendant of the original Norman Marcher Lord for the area he lived in. Another was to re-establish many aspects of the Marcher Lord's role in society, [p379]. Whilst Owen is credited with producing a valuable body of antiquarian works, especially for Pembrokeshire, as well as genealogical manuscripts, it does seem slightly suspicious to me that Francis Jones adds, "most of which, somehow or other, seem to connect with his own family".[p379]

Owen was in communication with other researchers of his time and, as already stated with regard to Dwnn's work, the two copied from each other. After Owen's death, most of his manuscripts passed to two others, George William Griffith of Penybenglog and John Lloyd of Vairdre, who copied and added to them, as well as annotating and correcting the originals. David Edwardes of Rhydygorse had also copied some of Owen's manuscripts, as well as producing his own. Eventually William Lewes of Llwynderw acquired the majority of the work held, or produced, by these three men. As with previous owners, he annotated and copied this, extending the details to 1722. He also produced many volumes of his own, claiming to originate a new system of recording in which the pedigrees were grouped under the relevant chieftains. However, Francis Jones shows that, not only was this claim untrue, but that Lewes knew it was so, having annotated some earlier work of the same style. Comparisons of the early pedigrees from the various sources even show identical errors. [p413]

After the death of Lewes, the collection went to Edmund Pryce of Rhydybenne. Yet again they were added to, transcribed and extended. It was during this time that the Golden Grove copies were made.

By 1774, the general collection had passed to David Lloyd of Alltyrodyn, and from him it went to Edmund Protheroe, before being sold to the College of Arms. Some of the earlier volumes which had been lent out or given away at various times, as well as some of the copies, such as the Golden Grove books, have been found from other sources, enabling the history of the documents to be put together by Francis Jones.

As can be seen then, the account of the Parry family in the Golden Grove books has its origins in either Dwnn's or George Owen's work, depending on which of the two actually recorded it initially. It is possible that careful examination of the Protheroe manuscripts would indicate at what stage the details of the Parry family were then added in to the initial comment about their descent from Moreiddig, son of Idio Wyllt. Clearly, at some stage, descendants from the Poston line were in communication with one of the compilers of the manuscripts and supplied the details of the Poston descent. This was then attached to the pedigree as given by Dwnn, ready to make its appearance in the Golden Grove copy.

This makes the early stages of the account in the Golden Grove books as dubious as the link to Idio is in Dwnn's work.

A study of the Protheroe manuscripts might also clarify when the fictitious marriage of Moreiddig to Catherine Lacy was added. I would imagine that this was an invention to account for the land holdings of the family, the Lacys being known as the holders of much of the land from the time of Domesday.

Theophilus Jones's History of Breconshire
Francis Jones described Theophilus Jones as a "competent genealogist and armorist, although he relied mainly on the manuscripts of Hugh Thomas and William Lewes in those matters", [p440]. The notes to the Parry pedigree indicate that the descent of Griffith ap Harry came from a manuscript in the Herald's office. Various marriages were from a pedigree held by David Lloyd of Allt yr odin (who was mentioned above, with regard to the Protheroe manuscripts). The sources for other items are not specifically given. However, it is known that he used the Golden Grove books [p463 and 28], which no doubt accounts for the early stages of his version. There appears to be no explanation for the difference with regard to Nest's father. However, given the other errors in Jones's work, such as the contradictory statements with regard to Moreiddig Warwyn, it could just be a mistake.

Although I have not shown all of the descendants above, Theophilus Jones brings the pedigree up to date (for his time), for some of the branches. Griffith ap Harry's line ends with the two heiresses of Newcourt, probably because that is the end point in the other manuscripts Jones copied from. The line shown in the Golden Grove manuscript, ending with the two sons of James Parry, remains the same. No further descent is added to the final generation. Instead, the additional branches all connect in to earlier generations of that line. This makes me wonder, therefore, whether the details in the Golden Grove books were obtained from James Parry, or one of his two sons. Since James is recorded as having married a daughter of the Earl of Pembroke, this could indicate their continued involvement with the Earl, perhaps during the time of the Civil War. This would have brought them into contact with other gentry who were royalists, such as the Vaughans of Golden Grove, as well as perhaps ultimately resulting in either their death, or their movement away from Herefordshire and Breconshire (and hence no local descendants for Jones to obtain family details from).

The title in Jones' work - "The Parrys of Poston, Herefordshire, and Llandevailog Tre'r Graig, Breconshire" can obviously be derived from a combination of the Golden Grove information, and the descendant Parrys that Jones probably had contact with. I suspect that the term "Old Court", which also appears as the home for Harry John, was taken to be just another name for Poston. Such an identification could have been aided by the application of the term "Poston" to all of the early generations in the 1634 Visitation, although I am not sure whether Jones used this manuscript at all. (If he had then one would have expected him to show the Wilmiston branch at least, which he does not do.)

The fact that Jones relied on the earlier work from the Golden Grove, which in turn was based upon the version in Dwnn, obviously makes this account of the Parry ancestry as suspect as the other sources for the early generations. Bartrum comments on Jones's History of Breconshire as containing a "corrupt version of the ancestry of Eidio Wyllt", [29]. Until I obtain details of Bartrum's work, I can not comment on exactly what is "corrupt" about the ancestry, but there are obviously problems with the account generally.

However, this is the account which has become the most well known, and often repeated, version of the pedigree for the Parrys from the Golden Valley.

Bartrum's Welsh Genealogies
A discussion of this work will follow once I have the details from the work itself.
Top
Discussion Menu

Conclusion

I hope that, through the discussion of both the sources and the situations that produced them, it can be seen that much of the account of these Parrys that has come to us through the years is incorrect. Whilst the Welsh tradition of knowing one's pedigree might have maintained some details, which were then recorded in the 1569 Visitation, the addition, in Llyfr Baglan, of the generations between Henry ap John and Moreiddig, is more likely to have been the result of the attitudes of the time. The connection of the Poston Parrys to Idio Wyllt by Dwnn, and consequently the descent of the family from the kings of Ireland, seems to have been the result of antiquarian speculation, perhaps coupled with the incorrect identification of two people having the same name. And once the details of the later generations were added on to this link, the "illustrious ancestry of the Parrys of Poston" became the version which has been repeated ever since.

The Parrys from the Newcourt line, of Arxton, Dulas and Morehampton, as well as those of Wilmiston, who were a younger branch of the Poston line, disappeared without trace as the more locally produced manuscripts remained unpublished until the 1900s. Perhaps a few dedicated Parry researchers have been able to track down the details from Llyfr Baglan, or the 1634 Visitation. But, for most people, the account in Jones was accepted as accurate.

Overall this leads me to the conclusion that the information from the 1569 Visitation could be a good starting point for studying the pedigree, with Llyfr Baglan, and then the later Visitation, being used to establish the situation in the family around 1600, and in 1634. However, even this has its problems. The line of "John, Stephen, John", shown as descendants of Miles in the 1569 Visitation, appears in different places in the pedigrees of Llyfr Baglan. It is almost as if, with the greater detail that was collected by John Williams, it became apparent that a different John was the son of Miles. If the more recent information in the 1569 Visitation is thus in doubt, what does that say about the earlier details?

It is clear that other evidence will need to be found for the existence of each of the individuals, and to confirm the connections between them. Evidence for the existence of specific individuals in the pedigree will be considered in detail on the main discussion page. But the final decision as to a suitable "start point" from which to discuss the rest of the pedigree, should also be based on evidence of this nature since, as indicated, the pedigrees themselves are unreliable. There is no point trying to discuss people who may or may not have existed.

It is known that a John ap Henry was sheriff of Herefordshire in 1399, and a member of parliament for the county on several occasions during the reigns of Henry IV and Henry V, [30]. As already mentioned, a Griffith ap Henry was pardoned in 1403 for taking part in the uprising of Owen Glyndwr. Thus official evidence for these two individuals can certainly be found from the end of the fourteenth century.

But were they brothers?

According to David Williams, Griffithe and John ap Henry are cited in a petition to the king in 1398, for their part in actions against Dore Abbey [31]. This could be sufficient to show the connection between them and I will be obtaining a copy of the original record in order to confirm the details. However, when I examined the Calendar of Patent Rolls, I found a reference to a complaint by the Abbot of Dore, 6 February 1398, [32]. In this a Henry ap Griffyth was cited as one of several men who had assaulted the Abbott. But a John ap Griffth was one of the Abbott's servants, who were assaulted. This indicates how easy it is, with the Welsh patronymic system, to find people who might appear to be related to each other, through having the same "surname" but who, in reality, were probably unrelated.

As yet, I have not found any references to Harry ap John, and some of the information seems to produce a different picture for the two men, Griffith ap Harry and John ap Harry:
- From the 1569 Visitation, Griffith's line maintained the Welsh naming pattern, whereas John's had adopted the English style.
- Griffith fought for Owen Glyndwr, thus rebelling against English authority, whilst John, having been sheriff of the county and later to become an MP, appears to have been on the side of the English.

There are several instances of such apparent contradictions amongst the border families, and this is obviously an area to be investigated further. However, in the absence of any records relating to Harry ap John, or specifically connecting Griffith and John as brothers, it would seem to be more appropriate to deal with their lines separately, treating each of them as the earliest ancestor for their own line.

This is what I propose to do in the main discussion page although for now, on the full pedigree page, I will continue to show Harry ap John in order to indicate the possible direction for future research into the earlier generations.

Top

Sources and notes

[1] Source for Y Dref hir = Longtown
Ewyas and Archenfield - Wales in Herefordshire, England Website
I checked this in a dictionary, which confirmed that for "Dref" one should see "Tref", which translated as "town" or "home". "Hir" translated as "long" or "lengthy". But it would be helpful to find Longtown referred to as "Dref hir" in other sources, since I had not come across it prior to the entry in Dwnn.
[Return]
[2] Gerald's Quote
Original source - The Description of Wales, by Gerald of Wales, available online from The Gutenberg Collection
Also mentioned on p92, A Mirror of Medieval Wales. Gerald of Wales and His Journey of 1188, by Charles Kightly, (Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments. 1988)
[Return]
[3] Article by Francis Jones
An Approach to Welsh Genealogy, by Major Francis Jones, T.D.(Transactions of the Honourable Society of the Cymmrodorion, session 1948)
[Return]
[4] Position of Offa's Dyke
J & M West A History of Herefordshire, published 1985, by Phillimore & Co. Ltd. Pages 33/34.
William Rees An Historical Atlas of Wales, published 1972, by Faber & Faber Ltd. Page 17, and Plate 21.
[Return]
[5] References to members of the same family fighting on opposite sides in Wars
The "Ab Thomas" brothers, mentioned under Pembroke in Lewis's Topographical Dictionary of Wales, published 1833, by S Lewis & Co. Also available from Archive CD Books, (either separately or combined with Wales Illustrated).
The text of the reference concerning the "Ab Thomas" brothers is also available on the Genuki site.
[Note: H T Evans, on page 115 of his book Wales and the Wars of the Roses does seem dubious about this reference. He refers to the fact that Morgan ap Thomas had previously been hostile to Edward's government (ie the Yorkists) and that the family had been consistent supporters of Jasper.]
Whilst not referring to very close relations, Geoffrey Hodges, on p171 of his book Owain Glyn Dwr & the War of Independence in the Welsh Borders, published 1995, by Logaston Press., comments on the descendants of Owain who supported opposite sides in the Wars of the Roses.
Herberts in the Civil War - see note 22.
[Return]
[6] Early Church Charter Records
Llandaff Episcopal Acta 1140-1287, Ed. David Crouch (South Wales Record Society 1988)
St Davids Episcopal Acta 1085-1280, Ed. Julia Barrow (South Wales Record Society 1998)
[Return]
[7] Punitive Laws against the Welsh
Quoted partially in Francis Jones p 342, but more fully on one of Gareth's help pages concerning the Cattle Drovers. (Use "Edit - Find" with part of the phrase, eg "bards" to find the quote).
Hodges (p162) also mentions John Scudamore being dismissed from his post in 1430 under the terms of the 1401 statute which forbade an Englishman to marry a Welsh woman.
Chapter 2 of H T Evans book gives further details on the effects of the Penal Laws.
[Return]
[8] Consequences for Griffith ap Harry, of supporting Owen Glyndwr
A History of Monmouthshire, by Sir Joseph Bradney. (Academy Books 1993) Vol.3 (The Hundred of Usk), part 1, page 82, referenced to Cal. Rot. Pat. Hen. IV., 1401-5.
[Two Calendar of Patent Rolls references to be added]
[Return]
[9] People went to Agincourt to avoid persecution by supporters of Owen Glyndwr
H T Evans, Wales and the Wars of the Roses, page 12.
[Return]
[10] Rev. Thomas Wilkins
Rice Merrick. Morganiae Archaiographia, ed. Brian Ll. James, published 1983 by the South Wales Record Society. Thomas Wilkins's involvement is mentioned on several pages, which are referenced in the index.
[Return]
[11] Rev. Thomas Wilkins
Llyfr Baglan, page v. This page also refers to the family's change of name, from Wilkins to De Winton.
[Return]
[12] Jones- Parry in Burkes
Jones Parry pedigree - Burkes Landed Gentry 18th edition, Vol. II, p490/1
[Return]
[13] People suggesting the Jones-Parry family relate to the Golden Valley Parrys
Annals & Antiquities of the County Families of Wales Thomas Nicholas. Page 356
History of Powys Fadog J.Y.W.Lloyd, Vol II, p130.
And the story is perpetuated on the internet:
Parry Forum
Web Pages [Choose "Family Tree" - "General Index" and then follow name links to find Geoffrey Parry. Note that no birth details are given for Geoffrey.]
[Return]
[14] Ellen Wood's reprint
Rowland Vaughan His Booke, published 1610, Republished and prefaced by Ellen Beatrice Wood, 1897.
[Return]
[15] C H H Parry's family history
In The Parrys of the Golden Vale, by Anthony Boden (Thames Publishing 1998)
[Return]
[16] Works by Joseph Henry Parry:
Publications: see bibliography.
Additional note - Evidence of communication between J H Parry and the Woods:
In her introduction to the reprint of Vaughan's Waterworks, Ellen thanks J H Parry, both for his hospitality when she stayed there in order to visit New Court and the Golden valley, and for further visits he had carried out in order to check information for her.
On LDS film 104359, amongst Wood's pedigrees, are some recorded as coming from J H Parry.
[Return]
[17] Existence of 1683 Visitation
Siddons pxiii of the 1634 visitation
[Return]
[18] Stephen Parry's link to Lord Grey
Parliamentary History of the County of Herefordshire, by W R Williams, (privately published 1896)
My thanks to Frank Kenward for supplying this information 7 June 2003.
[Return]
[19] Richard of Cwrt Gilbert
Siddons p179, note 2, of the 1634 visitation
[Further reference to follow with regard to Richard carrying out genealogical research.]
[Return]
[20] Information concerning Samuel Rush Meyrick
See the page on the Historic Herefordshire site. Note the details concerning Meyrick's own descent, a possible source for his interest in the Parry family, and also his connection with Sir Walter Scott who was mentioned above under the "after 1700" section of the context information.

It seems plausible that the portrait of "Bishop Richard Parry" could have been sold, or given, to a local Parry family when Goodrich Court was cleared, ready to make its reappearance as "Bishop Henry Parry" several generations later.

[Another interesting coincidence of names - Margaret, the daughter of Sir Gelly Meyrick (the Elizabethan adventurer Samuel Meyrick claimed, without justification, to descend from) was the wife of Sir John Vaughan of Golden Grove, (for whom the Golden Grove manuscripts were produced) [Source The pattern of politics in Stuart Wales, by Professor A H Dodd, M. A., p15 Transactions of the Honourable Society of the Cymmrodorion, session 1948.]
[Return]
[21] First publication of works by Gerald of Wales
Although in limited circulation from the time of writing, Gerald's works became well known when first printed in Latin in Elizabethan times, while English and Welsh versions appeared from the nineteenth century. Source: P99 A Mirror of Medieval Wales. Gerald of Wales and His Journey of 1188, by Charles Kightly, (Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments. 1988)
[Return]
[22] Civil War destruction of Raglan
The Castles of Wales site
[Return]
[23] Investigations into the Herbert ancestry
Llyfr Baglan, pages 13, 224/5
Also in Meyrick's publication of Dwnn's Heraldic Visitations. In the notes on pages 196 and 197, Meyrick cites Coxe's Historical Tour of Monmouthshire and Fenton's Tour as both referring to a document purporting to be the return of a commission by Edward IV to various people, authorising them to inquire into the Herbert pedigree. Meyrick quotes the text as given by Fenton, but indicates, for various reasons, that it must be a forgery.
[Return]
[24] Doubts about the Cecil ancestry
Several web sites imply the connection was dubious and just another fiction of the Tudor period. I have not investigated this further.
William Cecil, Lord Burghley - from a site concerning Francis Bacon.
From Tudorplace. com (appears to be the same text as first reference).
1911 encyclopedia.
Also Robinson, in his A History of the Mansions & Manors of Herefordshire page 322, describes their reported ancestry as being fictitious. He refers to the genealogy of the Cecils as having "suffered so severely at the hands of unscrupulous heralds who thought to flatter the pride of Lord Burleigh, that it is almost impossible nowadays to recover the truth."
[Return]
[25] The Parrys served the Herberts
H T Evans, Wales and the Wars of the Roses contains several references to members of the family as subordinates to the Herberts. These will be detailed on the full discussion pages.
[Return]
[26] The role of the sons of Nest
The Cambro-Norman Invasion of Ireland from "Ireland's History in Maps".
An essay about "Strongbow" on the Castles of Wales site.
[Return]
[27] References to "Edric the Wild"
A search engine such as Google, using the phrase "Edric the Wild", will produce many references to this character, eg Geoff Boxell's site, which is also repeated on the Britannia site.
Remember that it is supposition, on my part, that there might be some confounding between the stories of Edric and those of Idio. Further information on Idio, perhaps from Bartrum's work, could demonstrate that I am mistaken and that there is evidence for his existence as a distinct individual.
[Return]
[28] That Theophilus Jones used the Golden Grove books
Page 463 of Francis Jones, also quoted on the introductory page to the Golden Grove books on the Gathering the jewels site.
[Return]
[29] Bartrum's reference to the corrupt version of the ancestry of Eidio Wyllt
Some Studies in Early Welsh History, by P C Bartrum, B.A. (Transactions of the Honourable Society of the Cymmrodorion, session 1948)
[Return]
[30] John ap Henry
Collections towards the History and Antiquities of the County of Hereford, by John Duncomb. (Merton Priory Press, 1996)
Vol.1, part 1, page 143
Vol.1, part 1, page 153
[Return]
[31] The Henry brothers attacking Dore Abbey
"The Abbey of Dore", by David H Williams, chapter III of A Definitive History of Dore Abbey, ed. Ron Shoesmith & Ruth Richardson. Page 27. Also note 75, p219, giving the original source as PRO SC 8/213/10624.
[Return]
[32] Other attacks on Dore Abbey
Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1398. February 6, Shrewsbury (p362)
[Return]
[33] History & Myth
After I'd written this, I came across an article that expresses a similar idea, and also relates to the same time period.

"In the end myth can sometimes have a greater impact on people's minds and imaginations than the actual history. Another way of expressing this sentiment is to say that what actually occurs in history is sometimes less important than what people believed happened. And what is believed can be a powerful force in motivating people to action. The myths of history can help in forging the attitudes people have about their culture, government, religion, and position in the world." [Madoc and John Dee: Welsh Myth and Elizabethan Imperialism - an article from the Elizabethan Review by Robert W. Barone]

The extent to which the various "facts" of history are actually fictions is not an area that I am qualified to discuss. But it is evident in our own day and age that some people cling to beliefs which can be shown to be false, and that many issues are not clear cut, such that what is considered to be the "truth" is actually a matter of opinion.

Each side of an argument presents their opinions as the truth. Were our ancestors any different?

The full article can be found at both of these sites:
The Elizabethan Review
Doug's Archaeology Site

And, as one might expect, the subject of the articles has been picked up on by Madoc researchers:
Howard Kimberley's site.

To tie this in with the Parry family - Dr John Dee is often described as a cousin of Blanch Parry:
Tudorplace.com
John Dee (1527-1608) by Charlotte Fell Smith. [NOTE this is a pdf document]
[Return]

Top

Other bits & pieces

For those interested in following up the history, the following sites have some maps:
Firstly, there are two maps showing the Welsh Frontier in Anglo-Saxon times, and in the 14th century, appearing in a book called The Normans in South Wales, 1070-1171.
Secondly, the series of maps on Glyn Hale's site relating to 1284 and 1399 and then after the Act of Union in 1536.
Some 'timelines' for the UK can also be found at the BBC site, and specifically for Herefordshire on the Historic Herefordshire On Line site.
Another site with A Brief History of Wales

The Two Portraits
Since the web page with this informaton has now been removed, I repeat the text concerning the portraits here:

2. A pair of paintings, known as portrait of Master de Winton and portrait of his wife Catherine Parry, by John Lewis, 1765. The sitters are believed to be Jeffreys Wilkins (1748-1819), a founder of the bank of Wilkins and Co, and his wife Catherine Parry (1756-1827). The Wilkins family was descended from a Norman family named 'de Wintona' which changed its name to 'Wilkyn' in the 14th century. During the later 18th century the family began to resume the surname of de Winton. Jeffreys Wilkins is a representative example of Welsh 18th century gentry who sought their fortunes in India before investing in land and commerce. In 1778 Jeffreys and his brother Walter Wilkins founded the bank of Wilkins & Co. Wilkins & Co became the most important banking partnership in South Wales during the late 18th and 19th centuries and remained essentially a family concern until it was taken over by Lloyds Bank in 1890. As a founder of Wilkins & Co, Jeffreys Wilkins made a major contribution to the industrial revolution in Wales. John Lewis (fl. 1737-1776) was one of the most outstanding portrait painters working in Wales during the 18th century. This pair of portraits incorporate an accurate representation of Wallsworth Hall, Gloucestershire. They are his finest known works. As there were no centres of population in early modern Wales large enough to provide continuous employment for artists, Welsh patrons either had their portraits painted in London, or relied upon itinerant artists who periodically toured the Principality. Such artists could not compete with metropolitan painters such as Reynolds or Cotes, but they were of major significance for the Welsh gentry. Lewis was one such painter and as he both signed and dated his portraits, they are of significance as an index to less well documented Welsh portraiture. [Return]

Top

Bibliography

Julia Barrow (ed.) St Davids Episcopal Acta 1085-1280, South Wales Record Society 1998
Anthony Boden The Parrys of the Golden Vale, Thames Publishing 1998
Joseph Bradney Llyfr Baglan or The Book of Baglan, published 1910.
Joseph Bradney A History of Monmouthshire, Academy Books 1993
Gerald of Wales The Description of Wales
David Crouch (ed.) Llandaff Episcopal Acta 1140-1287, South Wales Record Society 1988
H T Evans Wales and the Wars of the Roses
Geoffrey Hodges Owain Glyn Dwr & the War of Independence in the Welsh Borders, Logaston Press 1995
Major Francis Jones An Approach to Welsh Genealogy, Transactions of the Honourable Society of the Cymmrodorion, session 1948
Jones & Bailey A History of the County of Brecknock (Glanusk edition) Published in four volumes between 1909-1930.
Charles Kightly A Mirror of Medieval Wales. Gerald of Wales and His Journey of 1188 (Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments. 1988)
Lewis's Topographical Dictionary of Wales, S Lewis & Co. 1833
J.Y.W.Lloyd History of Powys Fadog
Sir Samuel Rush Meyrick Heraldic Visitations of Wales and Part of the Marches, between the years 1586 and 1613 compiled by Lewis Dwnn. 1846.
Thomas Nicholas Annals & Antiquities of the County Families of Wales
Joseph Henry Parry (Further details of these can be found through the Family History Library CatalogueSearch.):
Parish register transcripts,1591-1812 (Bishops Cannings, Wiltshire)
The register book of Llandinabo, Pencoyd and Harewood in the county of Hereford
The register of Edmund Lacy, Bishop of Hereford (A.D. 1417-1420)
The register of Robert Mascall, Bishop of Hereford (A.D. 1404-1416)
The registers of Allcannings and Etchilhampton, Wiltshire
The registers of Bishop Cannings, Wiltshire
Registrum Johannis de Trillek, Episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCCXLIV-MCCCLXI
Registrum Johannis Gilbert, Episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCCLXXV-MCCCLXXIX
Registrum Johannis Stanbury, Episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCCCLIII-MCCCCLXXIV
Registrum Ludowici de Charltone, Episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCCLXI-MCCLXX
William Rees An Historical Atlas of Wales, Faber & Faber Ltd. 1972
M P Siddons Visitations by the Heralds in Wales, Harleian Society 1996
M P Siddons The Visitation of Herefordshire 1634 Harleian Society 2002
F W Weaver (ed.) The Visitation of Herefordshire 1569 1886.
J & M West A History of Herefordshire, Phillimore & Co. Ltd. 1985
W R Williams Parliamentary History of the County of Herefordshire, 1896
Ellen Beatrice Wood Rowland Vaughan His Booke, published 1610, 1897
Top
The main "Parrys of the Golden valley" Discussion page

Parry Pedigrees Index page
Copyright © Barbara Griffiths 2004
Last amended: 8 June 2016