Archives

2025: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2026: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 120 days are automatically archived 2 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

Hi Tipcake. In this edit summary you've said that one author doesn't believe that Llywelyn the Great or his father ever used the arms traditionally attributed to Llywelyn. Should this be covered at Royal Badge of Wales? The relevant section there is essentially our main coverage of those arms (and it's entirely without references!). Ham II (talk) 10:05, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ham II. Yes, that's right. Matthew Paris first uses the arms in reference to the death of Gruffudd ap Llywelyn ab Iorwerth in 1244 and Dafydd ap Llywelyn in 1246. The arms are attributed to Iorwerth Drwyndwn in Fouke le Fitz Waryn, however, which was written in about 1260. This is, of course, postdating the use of these arms by Matthew for Gruffudd and Dafydd, and was concurrent with their use by Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, so Michael Siddons does not seem to think they were contemporaneously used by Iorwerth or his son Llywelyn. He also says the lions are drawn from the Royal Badge of England, as Dafydd was a grandson of King John of England. I can give you specific quotes this afternoon. Tipcake (talk) 10:22, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ham II Ok, here is what he says:

LLYWELYN AB IORWERTH DRWYNDWN (WG, Gruffudd ap Cynan 5)

i.e. Llywelyn the Great (d.1240), Prince of Gwynedd. See under Wales, princes of, and chapter 7 of vol.I. No contemporary evidence of his bearing arms has survived. The Welsh MSS mostly give:

• Quarterly Gules and Or, four lions passant gardant counter-changed.
  • (d: Pen.127D, part 2, p.274; TLLI, 99, not gardant; GrH 2, 102; Pen.147B, 146, not gardant; Sotheby C 3, 128, not gardant; Geo.O.2, 86; WDLL, 79; p: GrH 3, 320; Pen.149B, 29; WC 2, 316; Harleian 1143, No.7; Geo.O.1, 16v, 'arglwydd Lewelyn'; TJC 1, 72, ditto; EP, 3r; NLW MS 6434D, 16)
• ditto, colours reversed
  • (d: NLW MS 3032B, 65)

This is from vol. 2, p. 343 of the book series I cited. As you can verify, all these manuscripts are sixteenth century or later. Likewise for Iorwerth Drwyndwn, from p. 275 of the same volume:

IORWERTH DRWYNDWN AB OWAIN GWYNEDD (WG, Gruffudd ap Cynan 4)

(late 12th c.), father of Llywelyn the Great. For the arms of the princes of Gwynedd, see under Wales, princes of; see also entries for Gruffudd ap Cynan and Owain Gwynedd. Their heraldry is discussed in detail in vol. I, chapter 7.

• Qu. Or and Gules, four leopards (lions passant gardant) counter-changed.
  • (d: FFW, 19)
• ditto, colours reversed.
  • (d: GrH 5, i, 112 and 118; p: WC 1, 23r; WC 2, 531)
• also: Sable, a lion rampant Or, armed and langued Gules, in a bordure engrailed Or.
  • (p: EP, 5v, [.........]wyndwn; NLW MS 6434D, 9, plain bordure)

And for the origins of the heraldry, from chapter 7 of book 1, p. 280. I have put in page-numbers for ease of your citation:

The earliest clear evidence of the arms of the princes of Gwynedd appears in one of the manuscripts of Matthew Paris, dated c.1253. In the margin of f.169 of this manuscript is depicted Gruffudd ap Llywelyn falling to his death while trying to escape from the Tower of London on St. David's day 1244. Beneath is a shield painted upside down, to denote Gruffudd's death, and bearing the arms: Quarterly Or and Gules, four lions passant counter-changed (frontispiece)?. The accompanying text reads: Quomodo Griffinus Leolini filius de Turri Londoniarum corruens expiravit. The same manuscript gives on f.198 the same arms for Dafydd ap Llywelyn, Gruffudd's half-brother, on a reversed shield, with the mention: De morte David principis Norhwallie (pl. XXI (a)) . Dafydd died on 25 February 1246. The same Dafydd is given quite different arms by Matthew Paris in another manuscript: Or, three roundels Vert; on a chief dancetty Vert a lion passant Sable, the shield again being reversed (pl. XXI (b)). The text reads: Et cito post memoratus David.... This last coat appears nowhere else, either in contemporary or later sources.

At least three impressions have survived of the seals of Llywelyn ab lorwerth (Llywelyn the Great, who died on 11 April 1240), father of these two half-brothers. They are all equestrian, and from at least two different matrices, but show no heraldry. They have been fully described elsewhere. Llywelyn, styling himself Prince of Aberffraw and Lord of Snowdon, writing shortly after 2 May 1230 to William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, explained that he sealed this letter with his secret or privy seal, because he had not got his Great Seal with him. Evan Evans (1731-88) copied a charter of Llywelyn ab lorwerth dated 1230, and described the seal as being of green wax 'with the print of a man in armour of the one side, & a floure of the other side, and the Tagg is of twist silk'.

Owen and Blakeway described with the aid of an engraving the seal attached to a bond by Dafydd ap Llywelyn, the son of Llywelyn the Great by his wife Joan, daughter of King John, to his uncle, Henry III, in 1241 or 12428. This was from a double matrix, very imperfect, and with all the inscription missing. The obverse showed a sovereign enthroned, holding a sword in his right hand. The left hand is outstretched, but whatever it held has been lost. The reverse showed a man mounted on a horse, carrying a shield charged with what appeared to be a lion rampant. The authors remarked that apart from the lion, the seal impression appeared exactly like that of the Great Seal of Henry III, and an examination of Henry's first Great Seal, used at the period of this document, confirms that this is [p. 281] almost certainly the matrix used in this case. The lions of England were evidently shaved off the seal impression, and the single lion cut in subsequently. This seal therefore affords no evidence as to Dafydd's arms.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, writing to the Bishop of Bath and Wells on 17 December 1282, informed him that Llywelyn ap Gruffudd's 'small seal' was found in his breeches after his death. The Archbishop said that he was keeping it safely to send to the king if he so wished. As another source states that Llywelyn's privy seal was found on his body, we may safely assume that this was that just referred to as his 'small seal. A further tantalising reference to Welsh princely seals is given by A.J. Taylor. The Jewels Roll for 1284 records the receipt into the Wardrobe of the seals of the late Princes of Wales, Llywelyn ap Gruffudd and Dafydd ap Gruffudd, sons of Gruffudd ap Llywelyn, and of the Princess Eleanor (Eleanor de Montfort, wife of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd). These seals were, it seems, melted down, and the silver from them made into a chalice for the new abbey of Vale Royal. Unfortunately, it does not appear that any impression of any of these seals, which were very probably heraldic, has survived.

The coat given for Dafydd ap Llywelyn and his brother Gruffudd by Matthew Paris was clearly accepted, with variations, as that of the native princes of Gwynedd and later of Wales, and they are quoted in English and French sources of the late thirteenth century, either as the arms of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, or else as those of the Prince of Wales. The Wijnbergen Manuscript, a French armorial of c.1270-80, gives them as the arms of le Roy de Gales (pl. XXII (a)), and Girart d'Amiens, in his Arthurian romance Escanor', dedicated to Eleanor of Castile, c.1280, gives arms clearly referring to these for the 'King' of Wales.

Li rois de Gales, qui avoit / Le meillor cheval c'on savoit / Mais les armes et granz et lees / D'or et d'argent esquartelees / A liepardiaus de l'un en l'autre.

Fouke le Fitz Waryn, a romance in French from the Shropshire-Welsh border country, considered to be a recension dated c.1320 of a poem originally composed about 1260, gives to Yervard Droyndoun, prince de Gales (lorwerth Drwyndwn, father of Llywelyn the Great), the arms: de or e de goules quartyle e en chescun quarter un leopart.

I have found these arms of the Welsh princes of Gwynedd, and later of Wales, in ten heraldic rolls which date either certainly or probably from before the extinction of Welsh independence in 1282. Some of these are painted and others in blazon. Some have not survived in the original and only much later copies are now available. The painted arms are almost always shown as quarterly Or [p. 282] and Gules, although in Segar's Roll the order is reversed. The lions are variously shown as passant, in a manuscript of Matthew Paris (frontispiece and pl. XXI (a)), in one copy of Segar's Roll, and in the Lord Marshal's Roll (pl. XXII (c)); as rampant gardant in the Fitzwilliam version of the Heralds' Roll (pl. XXII (b))1; rampant in the Wijnbergen Manuscript (pl. XXII (a)); passant gardant in the Heralds' version of the Heralds' Roll, a copy of Segar's Roll and St. George's Roll; and statant gardant in Smallpece's Rolls. Unfortunately much of the paint has been lost from some of the surviving original rolls, such as the Camden Roll, where it is now no longer possible to make out any lions on the shield of the Prince of Wales. They are given as leopards in later copies. Only one lion passant gardant can now be distinguished on the Prince's shield in the Heralds' version of the Heralds' Roll, the other three no longer being identifiable.

In those rolls where the coats are given in blazon, the lions are most often blazoned as leopards, i.e. lions passant gardant. This is the case in one version of Walford's Roll, c.1275, and the Camden Roll, c. 1280, whereas another version of Walford's Roll gives lions, i.e. lions rampant. It has been seen above that in 'Fouke le Fitz Waryn' and 'Escanor' they are described as leopards.

The arms of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd's brother Dafydd, who was executed on 3 October 1283, are shown in St. George's Roll as: Quarterly Or and Azure, four lions passant gardant counter-changed; and in the Lord Marshal's Roll as David, son ffrere, the previous coat being that of Prynce de Wales, as: Quarterly Argent and Azure, four lions passant counter-changed (pl. XXII (d)). It is not possible to date all these rolls precisely enough to be sure whether they were made in the lifetime of this prince or no, although Denholm-Young suggests that St. George's Roll was drawn up between the tournament at Kenilworth in 1279 and the agreement in 1281 between Roger Mortimer II and Llywelyn ap Gruffudd. This suggests that Dafydd did in fact bear a differenced version of his elder brother's arms.

As has been seen above, the various rolls and other sources were not unanimous concerning the position of the lions, the majority however giving lions passant or passant gardant, and later English sources of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries also mostly show the lions in the same fashion.

The colours and charges of the arms of Gwynedd, together with their almost contemporary attribution to the sons of Llywelyn the Great, the younger of whom, Dafydd, was the son of Llywelyn by his wife Joan, daughter of King John, and was named by Llywelyn as his heir, all point to the most likely derivation of this coat being from the English royal arms: Gules, three leopards, or lions passant gardant, Or.

I hope this helps! Tipcake (talk) 14:33, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Ednyfed Fychan is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Borsoka -- Borsoka (talk) 05:48, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Llywelyn ab Iorwerth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arfon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 22:32, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I agree that the spelling of Gruffudd Maelor I and Rhys ap Gruffudd is as you have moved it to now, and am not intending to revert the move, but I think maybe a discussion was in order for the featured article of Rhys ap Gruffudd. In any case, I would suggest you have only half done the change, as both articles now require editing to reflect the change. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:12, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I noticed that you are familiar with Ancient Greek, and I wanted to ask if you could help us improve the Ancient Greek Wikipedia, which we have been reviving over the past few months. You can see the recent changes here. --Caro de Segeda (talk) 11:17, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm .nhals8. I noticed that you recently removed content from Gofannon without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. -- in the club bumping that 17:39, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes, I did so because it is not argued in mainstream academic source that he was a genuine reflex of a pre-Christian deity. Rather, the medieval Welsh recycled names in -on because they recognised their antiquity (and gof is just the word for smith in Welsh so it makes sense that he is associated with smithing). I shall include that in my next edit. Tipcake (talk) 17:45, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your good article nomination of the article Ednyfed Fychan has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Borsoka -- Borsoka (talk) 09:45, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someone anonymous has contested your input in the Kingdom of Gwynedd article regarding the Coat of Arms of Llywelyn, which was referenced by Siddons. Do you want to revert and explain, or alter the text. Either way, perhaps use talk to explain the revert ? Cltjames (talk) 15:03, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I didn't add that section, I just changed the spelling of the names in it. It seems right to me to remove it, though. The first person to be attributed the arms is Gruffudd ap Llywelyn ab Iorwerth and the arms are never given to Gwynedd itself as far as I'm aware, rather always for just the 'Prince de Galles' or whatever in the manuscripts, as memory serves. Tipcake (talk) 15:08, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, over a year ago, some editors including myself tidied the Owain Glyndŵr article with references, structure and all-round work, but it hasn't been further developed since. I suggested trying to submit the article for GA assessment. After your work on Ednyfed Fychan, I was wondering if you'd like to help try to raise the standard and try and find some missing citations for the Glyndŵr article? Cltjames (talk) 21:14, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in theory yes, but there's far more secondary literature on Owain Glyndŵr than for Ednyfed Fychan. I expect to read a bit more about him in the next few months anyways, so I'll chip in where I can. Tipcake (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. In terms of the work needed, Talk:Owain Glyndŵr#Good article is the talk and has some suggestions. Then there are just more than five citations needed to make it a clean article ready for GA assessment. I couldn't find citations for the missing work, I tried asking but no one else came forward, but going through the history might uncover the author of the text. Something I'll try doing now... Cltjames (talk) 16:42, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the majority of the citations needed (six needed) were done by an anonymous IP almost 20 years ago, so I'm undecided as to simply remove the work from the text and try for a GA or not... Any thoughts ? Cltjames (talk) 17:35, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's not too much to look over, I think. I'll have a look later this month as I need re-read RR Davies anyways. Tipcake (talk) 10:08, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, great thanks. As well as the CN, there are also 5 page needed citations, some of which are easy, others a bit more difficult. Cltjames (talk) 14:16, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it will take a bit more work than that, honestly. There could be more background given and there are certain claims made in the article which are not backed up by the secondary literature I have to hand, i.e. that Owain Glyndŵr was 'crowned' at the parliament in Machynlleth, which is not in the pages cited in the very book given in the article. As I said, I'll be looking at him more thoroughly soon, so I will keep you notified... Tipcake (talk) 14:36, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you removed some context to the ancestry chart created, last year we had a consensus talk about the inclusion of that text, and for Llywelyn II as well. Please feel free to contribute to the talk to find the correct solution. But as for now, I personally feel the inclusion as a back story is vital to explaining the situation. Diolch. Cltjames (talk) 20:50, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please see my comments on the Owain Glyndŵr talk page. Tipcake (talk) 20:56, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was subscribed and saw the notification thanks. So, we can move forward to say, the information is there, so it is legitimately discussed, therefore it is a note, am I right? Something essential for the backstory, but is heavily debated, so this should be highlighted, not excluded, just needs to be in the correct section. Cltjames (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I quite follow your comment, sorry. If you want my opinion, I would suggest removing the text under the ancestry section since it merely confuses the reader with all these different viewpoints when in fact all except the reference to the supposed daughter of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd are true. The early life section needs a rewrite too since it claims he was the legitimate heir to different kingdoms. I seriously, seriously doubt that any of the cited sources say that he was the quote 'heir of both Deheubarth (House of Dinefwr) and Gwynedd (House of Aberffraw)', since both dynasties had male members in the fourteenth century, albeit among the minor nobility. Though then again as they are Victorian sources who knows. I can do that now, if you like. Tipcake (talk) 21:09, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, here is what Ben Guy (prof at Cambridge) has to say on the matter in his book from his PhD thesis called 'Medieval Welsh Genealogies (p. 45, n. 239):

Iolo Goch, Achau Owain Glyndŵr (ed. Johnston, pp. 36-42); Johnston, 'Iolo Goch', pp. 90-3. It would be profitable to examine the genealogies of Owain Glyndwr found in sixteenth-century manuscripts to determine whether they could have been composed during his lifetime. Versions of a text designed to show that Owain Glyndŵr was, through his mother, descended from Llywelyn ab Iorwerth and King John are found in Llanstephan 12, pp. 18-19 and 65-6 (s. xvi^med) and Brogyntyn I. 15, pp. 382 and 391 (1593-6); these must derive from the common exemplar of those manuscripts, probably written by Ieuan Brechfa (cf. Table A.4.1.1). The constituent components of the same text are also, interestingly, found among the few genealogical fragments in Peniarth 51, on pp. 186 and 209 (written by Gwilym Tew in the 1460s and 1470s). Immediately following the text in Llanstephan 12, p. 19 and Brogyntyn I. 15, p. 382 is a pedigree of Phylip ap Madog ab Ieuan, whose pedigree also occurs in Peniarth 51, p. 143. Phylip ap Madog was an early patron of Gutun Owain, and his pedigree is recorded in two of Gutun Owain's own genealogical manuscripts: see Guy, 'Writing Genealogy', pp. 109-11. Perhaps Ieuan Brechfa and Gwilym Tew both used a manuscript by Gutun Owain that included this genealogy of Owain Glyndwr (cf. LlIG (GO) G40.2.1-2). Might Iolo Goch be alluding to this same written genealogy when he claims that Owain was 'Aur burffrwyth iôr Aberffraw' ("fine pure fruit of the lord of Aberffraw', 1. 96)?

It is probably simplest to just quote this and Bartrum's modern genealogies rather than the rigamarole of trying to make a coherent summary from outdated sources. Tipcake (talk) 21:39, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so it's important to use more than one source on the matter. So I changed the text and re added into a note for the text we created as a team to explain Glyndwr's genealogy, and you are welcome to write a second note. And then maybe we can think of a way of integrating the texts correctly for the article and its readers. Cltjames (talk) 22:43, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't understand the merit of including the reference to the phantom daughter of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd. If anything it brings attention to a long debunked myth and thus is unhelpful to the reader. I am happy to reconcile the rest in the early life section. Tipcake (talk) 22:50, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the note is fine for whoever wishes to learn more in the article, as the conjecture does hold its own in the subject matter, also I've reincluded a similar text to the Llywelyn II article, because again, it is a missing piece of a jigsaw puzzle for readers and we went through with this before in a talk debate and decided on the inclusion. Feel free to rekindled the talks on Llywelyn II & Glyndwr. Cltjames (talk) 22:54, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have kept it and reconciled the old and the new. Tipcake (talk) 23:44, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good addition, and wise move. Also, I re added a short few sentences about Edward I, I feel the addition is worthy of the text. Cltjames (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! Tipcake (talk) 09:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, didn't see the IP squeezed another revert in there in between my series of edits just now. I'd have reverted it right away if I'd noticed. Apologies for making the revert slightly harder for you. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:59, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also to be aware, you are arguably over 3 reverts in 24 hours there. You might want to self revert the last, in case this goes to the edit warring noticeboard. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right, ok, I'll leave it, then. I was just asked to help out to improve the article to GA status, that's all. Tipcake (talk) 15:05, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh don't leave the article. I'm happy to support your edits. Just trying to avoid an accidental 3RR block. Self reverting will remove any breach of 3RR (not sure if it is one, depending on whether your first edit is considered a revert or not). But the IP is edit warring, and that never works out well. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:11, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Peidiwch â phoeni, diolch am eich cytuno a'ch cymorth, te! Tipcake (talk) 15:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dim problem. Hwyl. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:12, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's happened again, I'm afraid, if you're not aware. Sometimes I wonder if people have basic reading comprehension or even care about faithfully quoting sources..! Tipcake (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]