Skene's Four Ancient Books of
Wales
CHAPTER I.
THE POEMS CONTAINED IN THE FOUR ANCIENT BOOKS OF WALES.
The dissolution of the religious
houses in Wales in the reign of Henry the
Eighth, and the dispersion of their libraries, led to many Welsh MSS., which had
been preserved in them, passing into the hands of private individuals; and
collections of Welsh MSS. soon began to be formed by persons who took an
interest in the history and literature of their country.
The principal collectors in North Wales were Mr. Jones of Gelly Lyvdy, whose
collection was formed between the years 1590 and 1630, and Mr. Robert Vaughan of
Hengwrt, author of a work termed British Antiquities Revived, published
in 1662, who died at Hengwrt four years after, in 1666; and in South Wales,
William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, who formed a collection at Raglan Castle in
1590; and Sir Edward Mansel, whose father had received a gift of the priory of
Margam in Glamorgan, in 1591.
The collections of Mr. Jones and Mr. Vaughan became united at Hengwrt, in
arrangement having been made between them that the MSS. collected by each should
become the property of the survivor. Mr. Jones having predeceased Mr. Vaughan,
the united collection, consisting of upwards of 400 MSS., remained
at Hengwrt till within the last few years, when it was bequeathed by Sir
Robert Vaughan of Hengwrt to W. W. E. Wynne, Esq. of Peniarth, in whose
possession it now is.
In the following century various collections were made, and among others some
valuable MSS. became the property of Jesus College, Oxford. The collection of
the Earl of Pembroke at Raglan Castle was destroyed by fire in the time of
Oliver Cromwell; and a similar fate overtook two of those later collections,
which had become the property of Sir Watkin Williams Wynne, and were preserved
at Wynnstay, but which were likewise destroyed by fire. Other collections passed
into the British Museum, and the principal collections of Welsh MSS. are now the
Hengwrt collection at Peniarth, those in the British Museum, the MSS. at Jesus
College, and those belonging to Lord Mostyn, Mr. Panton of Plas Gwyn, and
others.
In the Hengwrt collection were preserved three ancient MSS., termed the Black
Book of Caermarthen, the Book of Aneurin, and the Book of Taliessin, containing
a considerable collection of Welsh poetry bearing marks of antiquity; and in
the, library of Jesus College is a MS. which contains similar poems, termed the
Red Book of Hergest. These poems are some of a historic character, and others
not so, and are attributed, either by their rubric, by the title of the MS., or
by tradition, to four bards termed Myrddin, Aneurin, Taliessin, and Llywarch
Hen, who are supposed to have lived in the sixth century.
Two of these MSS. are still in the Hengwrt collection, and of one of them we
know the history: the Black Book of Caermarthen belonged to the Priory of Black
Canons at Caermarthen, and was given by the Treasurer of the Church of St.
Davids to Sir John Price, a native of Breconshire, who was one of the
commissioners appointed by King Henry the Eighth; the other is the Book of
Taliessin, and it is not known how it was acquired.
The Book of Aneurin is now the property of Sir Thomas Phillipps of Middlehill.
The Red Book of Hergest is said to have been so termed from its having been
compiled for the Vaughans of Hergest Court, Herefordshire, and seems to have
come to Oxford from the Margam Collection in South Wales.
It is these four MSS.--the Black Book of Caermarthen, written in the reign of
Henry the Second (1154-1189); the Book of Aneurin, a MS. of the latter part of
the thirteenth century; the Book of Taliessin, a MS. of the beginning of the
fourteenth century; and the Red Book of Hergest, a MS. compiled at different
times in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries--that are here termed THE FOUR
ANCIENT BOOKS OF WALES, and it is with the ancient poems contained in these four
MSS. that we have now to do.
Numerous transcripts of these poems are to be found in other Welsh MSS., but
undoubtedly it is in these four MSS. that the most ancient. texts of the poems
are to be found; and, in most cases, those in the other MSS. are not
independent texts, but have obviously, with more or less variation, been
transcribed from these. The contents of these MSS. remained little known till
the publication of the Archæologia Britannica in 1707, by Edward Lhuyd,
who had examined all the collections which were accessible, and the account
which he included in his work of the Welsh MSS. attracted some attention towards
them, but none of the poems were printed till the middle of the century, when
the publication of the poems of Ossian by James Macpherson, and the sudden
popularity they acquired, gave a temporary value to Celtic poetry, and led to a
desire on the part of the Welsh to show that they were likewise in possession of
a body of native poems not less interesting than the Highland, and with better
claims to authenticity. In 1764, the Rev. Evan Evans published his Specimens
of the Poetry of the Ancient Welsh Bards; and though they mainly embraced
poems written in the twelfth and subsequent centuries, translated in the style
of Macpherson's Ossian, he annexed a Latin dissertation, De Bardis, in
which he printed ten of the stanzas of the great poem of the Gododin, and a
stanza from the Avallenau, as specimens of the older poems, with Latin
translations. He was followed by Edward Jones, who, in his Musical and
Poetical Relies of the Welsh Bards, published in 1784, printed a part of the
Gododin, three of the poems of Taliessin--viz. the Battle of Argoed Llwyfain,
the Battle of Gwenystrad, and the Mead song, one of the poems of Llywarch Hen,
with metrical translations, and part of the Avallenau, with a more literal prose translation by Mr.
Edward Williams. He was likewise assisted in his work by Dr. W. Owen, afterwards
Dr. Owen Pughe, who, a few years afterwards, published five of the poems of
Taliessin in the Gentleman's Magazine for the years 1789 and 1790, being the Ode
to Gwallawg, the Death-Song of Owen, the Battle of Dyffryn Garant, the Battle of
Gwenystrad, and the Gorchan Cynvelyn, with English translations. These
translations, however, were too diffuse and too much tainted by a desire to give
the passages a mystic meaning, to convey a fair idea of the real nature of the
poems.
In 1792, Dr. Owen Pughe published The Heroic Elegies, and other pieces of
Llywarch Hen, with a much more literal English version. The work contains a
pretty complete collection of the poems attributed to Llywarch Hen, but it is
not said from what MS. the text was printed, while the notes contain collations
with the Black Book of Caermarthen and the Red Book of Hergest.1
At length, in the year 1801, the text of the whole of these poems was given
to the world, through the munificence of Owen Jones, a furrier, in Thames
Street, London, who, in
that and subsequent years, published the Myvyrian Archæology of Wales,
containing the chief productions of Welsh literature. He was assisted by Mr.
Edward Williams of Glamorgan and Dr. Owen Pughe; but though the text of almost
all of these poems is given, it is not said from what particular MSS. they were
printed, and no materials are afforded for discriminating between what are
probably old and what are spurious. The text is unaccompanied by translations.
If the publication of the poems of Ossian thus drew attention to these
ancient Welsh poems, the controversy which followed on the poems drew forth an
able vindication of the genuine character of the latter. Sharon Turner, in his History
of the Anglo-Saxons, the first edition of which appeared in 1799, founded
upon some of these poems as historical documents. He quoted the Death-Song of
Geraint as containing the account of a real battle at Longporth, or Portsmouth,
between Cerdic, the founder of the kingdom of Wesser, and the Britons. He
referred to the poems of Taliessin on the battles of Argoed Llwyfain and
Gwenystrad as real history, and he considered the great poem of the Gododin by
Aneurin as describing a real war between the Britons and the Angles of Ida's
kingdom. This drew upon him the criticism of the two chief opponents of the
claims of Ossian--viz. John Pinkerton and Malcolm Laing--who declared that these
Welsh poems, were equally unworthy of credit. In consequence of this attack, Turner published,
in 1803, his Vindication of the genuineness of the ancient British poems of
Aneurin, Taliessin, Llywarch Hen, and Myrddin. In this elaborate essay he
endeavoured to demonstrate two propositions:--First, That these four bards were
real men, and actually lived in the sixth century; and, secondly, that, with
some exceptions, the poems attributed to them are their genuine works. He dealt,
however, with the historical poems alone as sufficient for his purpose, and did
not enter into any critical analysis of the poems as a, whole. This vindication,
was, in the main, considered to be conclusive as to the poems being the genuine
works of the bards whose name they bore; and it appeared to be now generally
accepted as a fact, that a body of genuine poetry, of the sixth century, existed
in the Welsh language which threw light upon the history of that century.
A new view was, however, soon taken of their real meaning; and some years
after, the Rev. Edward Davies brought out, in his work called the Mythology
of the British Druids, published in 1809, his theory that there was handed
down in these poems a system of mythology which had been the religion of the
Druids in the pagan period, and was still professed in secret by the bards,
their genuine successors. The Gododin, he endeavoured to show by an elaborate
translation, related to the traditionary history of the massacre of the Britons
by the Saxons at Stonehenge, called the Plot of the Long Knives; and he appended
to his work a number of the poems of Taliessin, with translations
to show the mystic meaning which pervaded them. This theory was
still further elaborated by the Honourable Algernon Herbert, in two works
published anonymously: Britannia after the Romans, in 1836; and The
Neo-Druidic Heresy, in 1838. He took the same view with regard to the
meaning of the Gododin; and he combined with much ingenious and wild speculation
regarding the post-Roman history of Britain, the theory that a lurking adherence
to the old paganism of the Druids had caused a schism in the British church, and
that the bards, under the name of Christians and the guise of Christian
nomenclature, professed in secret a paganism as an esoteric cult, which he
denominated the Neo-Druidic heresy, and which he maintained was obscurely hinted
at in the poems of Taliessin. It would probably be difficult to find a stranger
specimen of perverted ingenuity and misplaced learning than is contained in the
works of Davies and Herbert; but the urgency with which they maintained their
views, and the disguise under which the poems appeared in their so-called
translations, certainly produced an impression that the poems of Taliessin did
contain a mystic philosophy, while, at the same time, the Gododin of Aneurin and
the poems of Llywarch Hen were generally recognised as genuine historical
documents commemorating real historical events.
The Rev. John Williams, afterwards Archdeacon of Cardigan, an eminent Welsh
scholar, and a man of much talent, announced, in 1841, a translation of the
poems of Aneurin, Taliessin, and other primitive bards, with a
critical revision and re-establishment of the text; but, although
these poems had occupied a large share of his attention, I believe he never
seriously prepared the materials for his edition, and he died in 1858, without
having done anything towards carrying it out. I have frequently heard him give
as a reason the great difficulty involved, and time and labour required,
"in restoring the genuine text." What he meant by this we can see in
the last work he published, termed Gomer, where (part ii. p. 33 et seq.),
we have several specimens of how he meant to deal with the text. His plan
obviously was to restore the orthography of the words from the existing text in
the Myvyrian Archæology to what he conceived must have been their form when the
respective poems were composed. His mind, too, appears to have been influenced
in no slight degree by the school of Davies, and he was too ready to attach a
mystic meaning to the text. In 1850, some time before the Archdeacon's death, a
learned Breton, the Vicomte do la Villemarqué, published his Poemes des
Bardes Bretons du VIe. Siecle, traduits pour la premiere fois, avec
le texte en regard revu sur les plus anciens manuscrits; and he, too,
proceeded upon the same idea of restoring the original text. In his preface,
after noticing the oldest copies of the poems, which he says formed the basis of
his edition, he adds, "Apres le travail de collation, il restait a
reproduire les textes avec l'orthographe convenable, mais la quelle suivre;"
and he fixes upon the Breton orthography as the most ancient, and in this, which
he terms "l'orthographe historique," presents us with the text of the
poems which he translates. These poems are mainly the historical pieces, and he
considers with Turner that they contain fragments of real history.
A more unfortunate idea than that of thus arbitrarily restoring the text
never formed the basis of an important work; and while it has destroyed the
value of Villemarqué's edition, it lessens the regret we should otherwise feel
that the Archdeacon never carried his announced intention into effect. To
present the poems in a different shape from what they appear in the oldest
transcripts, and to clothe them with a supposed older orthography, is to
confound entirely the province of the editor with that of the historic critic,
and to exercise, in the character of the former, functions which properly belong
to the latter, while it deprives him of the proper materials on which to
exercise his critical judgment. Such restoration necessarily proceeds on the
assumption by the editor that the poems are the genuine works of those to whom
they are attributed, and existed in the same form and substance at the era at
which their reputed authors lived; while the application of historical criticism
to the poems as they now exist may lead to very different conclusions. It
supersedes entirely the important work of the critic, by assuming the very
questions which he has to solve. The true function of the editor is to select
the oldest and best MSS., and to produce the text of the poems in the precise
shape and orthography in which he there finds them: neither to tamper with, nor
to restore them, but to furnish the critic with the materials on which he can exercise
his skill in determining their true age and value.2
These remarks have likewise some bearing upon two very remarkable works which
have inaugurated a new school of criticism of these poems, and subjected their
claims to tests which they had not hitherto undergone. These two works are--first,
The Literature of the Kymry, by Thomas Stephens, published in 1849; and, secondly,
Taliessin, or the Bards and Druids of Britain, by D. W. Nash, published
in 1858.
The main object of Mr. Stephens' work is to treat of the language and
literature of the twelfth and two succeeding centuries; but it embraces likewise
the poems attributed to the bards of the sixth century, in so far as he
maintains that they are falsely so attributed, and are really the works of later
bards. Mr. Stephens' work is written with much ability, and is, in fact, the
first real attempt to subject these poems to anything like a critical analysis.
He opens one of his chapters, to which he has put the title, "Poems,
fictitiously attributed to Myrddin, Taliessin, Aneurin, Llywarch, Meugant, and
Golyddan," with the following sentence:--"Reader! be attentive to what
I am about to write, and keep a watchful eye upon the sentences as they rise
before you, for the daring spirit of modern criticism is about
to lay violent hands upon the old household furniture of
venerable tradition;" and he certainly fulfils this promise, for he
maintains that, with some exceptions, these poems contain allusions, and breathe
forth a spirit and sentiment, which demonstrate that they were composed
subsequent to the twelfth century; and he endeavours to indicate their real
authors. Of the poems attributed to Aneurin he appears to admit the Gododin to
be genuine. He considers the whole of the poems attributed to Myrddin, including
even the Avallenau--which Turner maintained to be genuine--to be spurious, and
the work of later bards, and endeavours to point out their real authors,
hesitatingly in the text, but more decidedly in the title to one of his
chapters, where he has "The Avallenau and Hoianau, composed by Prydydd y
Moch. The Gorddodau, composed by Gruffydd ab Yr Ynad Coch;" and of
seventy-seven poems attributed to Taliessin, he admits only twelve to be
"historical and as old as the sixth century."
His admission that some of these poems are as old as the sixth century of
course neutralises any argument drawn from their orthography and grammatical or
poetical structure, unless he can show that the poems he maintains to be
spurious differ materially in that respect from those he admits to be genuine;
and his attempt to indicate their real authors breaks down in so far as the
Avallenau and Hoianau, and other poems contained in the Black Book of
Caermarthen, are concerned; for the poems in that MS. must have
been already transcribed in the twelfth century, and Prydydd y Moch belongs
to the succeeding century. So far as he shows that several of these poems
contain direct allusions to events which occurred after the period when they are
said to be composed, his criticism is successful, and may be received as well
founded; but in his attempt to show that allusions, hitherto supposed to apply
to events contemporaneous with the alleged date of the poem, were really
intended to describe later events--which is, in fact, the main feature of his
criticism--he is not equally successful. His reasoning appears to me to be quite
inconclusive, the resemblances faint and uncertain, and the argument carries no
conviction to the mind. For instance, in the poem attributed to Taliessin,
termed Kerdd y Veib Llyr, where the lines occur--
"A battle against the lord of fame in the dales of Hafren,
Against Brochwel Powys; he loved my song"--
it is a fair and legitimate inference that it could not have been composed
prior to the time of Brochmail, who is mentioned by Bede as having been at the
battle of Caerlegion, the true date of which is 613; but when the following
lines occur in a subsequent part of the same poem--
"Three races, wrathful, of right qualities,
Gwyddyl, and Brython, and Romani,
Create war and tumult,"
it is not satisfactory to be told that "they refer to the ecclesiastic
dispute between Giraldus and King John respecting the see of St. David's."
It is therefore not without reason that the reader is exhorted to keep a watchful eye upon the
sentences condemning the poems upon such grounds.
Mr. Nash, in his work, deals with the poems attributed to Taliessin only, and
in the main he follows up the criticisms of Stephens. He goes, however, a step
beyond him, as, without directly asserting it, he implies that none of the poems
are older than the twelfth century, if he does not really assort that no earlier
date can be assigned to them than the date of the oldest MS. in which they are
found. Of the historical poems he sums up his criticism thus:--"Without,
therefore, venturing to decide that these 'Songs to Urien' were not re-written
in the twelfth century, from materials originally of the date of the sixth, and
that there are no poetical remains in the Welsh language older than the twelfth
century, we may nevertheless assert that the common assumption of such remains
of the date of the sixth century has been made upon very unsatisfactory grounds,
and without a sufficiently careful examination of the evidence on which such
assumption should be founded. Writers who claim for productions actually
existing only in MSS. of the twelfth all origin in the sixth century, are called
upon to demonstrate the links of evidence, either internal or external, which
bridge over this great intervening period of at least five hundred years. This
external evidence is altogether wanting, and the internal evidence, even of the
so-called 'Historical Poems' themselves, is, in some instances
at least, opposed to their claims to an origin in the sixth
century." What he calls the mythological poems he entirely rejects, and
appears to place them even in a much later age than Stephens has done.
While Mr. Nash's work must be admitted to be written with much ability,
certainly the merit of candour cannot equally be attributed to it. It is less an
attempt to subject the poems to a fair and just criticism than simply a very
clever piece of special pleading, in which, like all special pleading, he
proceeds to demonstrate a foregone conclusion by the usual partial and one-sided
view of the facts--assuming whatever appears to make for his argument, and
ignoring what seems to oppose it; while he makes conjectural alterations of the
text when it suits his purpose, and the real sense of the poems which form the
subject of his criticism is disguised under a version which he terms a
translation, but which affords anything but a faithful or candid representation
of their contents.
I consider that the true value of these poems is a problem which has still to
be solved. Are we to attach any real historical value to them, or are we to set
them aside at once as worthless for all historical purposes, and as merely
curious specimens of the nonsensical rhapsodies and perverted taste of a later
age?
Whether these poems are the genuine works of the bards whose names they bear,
or whether they are the production of a later age, I do not believe that they contain any such system
of Druidism, or Neo-Druidism, as Davies, Herbert, and others, attempt to find in
them; nor do I think that their authors wrote, and the compilers of these
ancient MSS. took the pains to transcribe, century after century, what was a
mere farrago of nonsense, and of no historical or literary value. I think that
these poems have a meaning, and that, both in connection with the history and
the literature of Wales, that meaning is worth finding out; and I think,
further, that if they were subjected to a just and candid criticism, we ought to
be able to ascertain their true place and value in the literature of Wales. The
criticism to which they have hitherto been subjected is equally unsatisfactory,
whether they are maintained to be genuine or to be spurious, mainly because the
basis of the criticism is an uncertain and untrustworthy text, and any criticism
on the existing texts, in the shape in which they are presented in the Myvyrian
Archæology, is, comparatively speaking, valueless; and because the translations
by which their meaning is attempted to be expressed, are either loose and
inaccurate, or coloured by the views of the translators. Those who deal with the
poems as the genuine works of the bards whose names they bear, and view them as
containing a recondite system of Druidism, or semi-pagan philosophy, present us
with a translation which is, to say the least of it, mysterious enough in all
conscience. Those, again, who consider them to be the work of a later age, and
to contain nothing but a mere farrago of nonsense, have no difficulty
in producing a translation which amply bears out that character.
The work of the editor must, however, precede that of the critic. An
essential preliminary is to give the text of these poems in the oldest form in
which it is to be found, and in the precise orthography of the oldest MSS., and
to present a translation which shall give as accurate and faithful a
representation of the meaning of the poems as is now possible as the basis of
the work of the critic. The object of the present work. is to accomplish this.
The contents of the four MSS., here called the Four Ancient Books of Wales,
are printed as accurately as possible,--those of the first three completely, and
as much of the last as contains any of these poems. It is in these four MSS.
that the oldest known texts are to be found; and in order to secure a faithful
and impartial translation, I resolved, in order to avoid any risk of its being
coloured by my own views, to refrain from attempting the translation myself, and
to obtain it, if possible, from the most eminent living Welsh scholars. With
this view, I applied to the Reverend D. Silvan Evans of Llanymawddwy, the author
of the English and Welsh Dictionary and other works, and the Reverend
Robert Williams of Rhydycroesau, author of the Biography of Eminent Welshmen
and the Cornish Dictionary, both distinguished Welsh scholars, who most
kindly acceded to my request. Mr. Evans, has translated for me the poems in the
Black Book of Caermarthen, the Book of Aneurin, and the Red Book
of Hergest, and accompanied them with valuable notes. Mr. Williams has
translated for me the poems in the Book of Taliessin; and I beg to record my
sense of the deep obligation under which they have laid me by the valuable
assistance thus afforded. But while these eminent scholars an so far answerable
for the translations, it is due to them to add that they are not responsible for
any opinions expressed in this work except those contained in their own notes;
and that, by permitting their names to be connected with this work, they must
not be held as sanctioning the views entertained by myself, and to which I have
given expression in the following chapters, or in the notes I have added.3

Footnotes
1. It is remarkable that there is no reference to readings in the Llyfr du
in the poems which are actually to be found there, while in six poems which are
not in the Black Book, the foot of the page is full of references to the Llyfr
du for various readings. These various readings, so far as I have been able
to judge, correspond with the Red Book of Hergest, while those attributed to the
Llyfr coch are not to be found there.
2. In 1852, an edition of the Gododin was published, with a translation, by J.
Williams, at Ithel. He adopts the historical view of this poem, and has given
the text, such as he had it, with much fidelity; while the translation, though
somewhat too free, is the first to give anything like a fair idea of the
original.
3. The Welsh text has been printed for some years. It was put in type as soon as
the collation of the manuscript copy of the poems with the original MSS. was
completed, and again collated in proof, and then thrown off, in order to
facilitate the work of translation. The only request made to the translators was
to make their version as literal and accurate as possible, even though the
meaning might be obscured thereby; and the care and time requisite to prepare
such a translation deliberately has delayed the appearance of the work since
then. While engaged in the preliminary investigations, I from time to time
communicated fragments of what was intended to appear in the Introduction and
Notes in occasional papers to the Archæologia Cambrensis.
1. It is remarkable that there is no reference to readings in the Llyfr du
in the poems which are actually to be found there, while in six poems which are
not in the Black Book, the foot of the page is full of references to the Llyfr
du for various readings. These various readings, so far as I have been able
to judge, correspond with the Red Book of Hergest, while those attributed to the
Llyfr coch are not to be found there.
2. In 1852, an edition of the Gododin was published, with a translation, by J.
Williams, at Ithel. He adopts the historical view of this poem, and has given
the text, such as he had it, with much fidelity; while the translation, though
somewhat too free, is the first to give anything like a fair idea of the
original.
3. The Welsh text has been printed for some years. It was put in type as soon as
the collation of the manuscript copy of the poems with the original MSS. was
completed, and again collated in proof, and then thrown off, in order to
facilitate the work of translation. The only request made to the translators was
to make their version as literal and accurate as possible, even though the
meaning might be obscured thereby; and the care and time requisite to prepare
such a translation deliberately has delayed the appearance of the work since
then. While engaged in the preliminary investigations, I from time to time
communicated fragments of what was intended to appear in the Introduction and
Notes in occasional papers to the Archæologia Cambrensis.
|
|