Talk:Tewdrig

Untitled

Rewrote so as to make clear the sources of information, with fuller citations and references given; it's still the same information. Changed class to "start" from "stub" on that basis – this is all that is known of him, so article expansion is unlikely. Notuncurious (talk) 23:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Anglo-Saxon

Tewdrig ap Teithfallt is a Welsh rendition of "Theodric son of Theobald". Clearly, this father and son pair must have been of Anglo-Saxon stock. Apparently, some of the invaders became "Britonicized" during the post-Roman era, before the establishment of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms? --dab (𒁳) 09:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. Sources, or original research? Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I removed the alleged connection between Tewdrig/Teithfallt and the Goths. The assertion that these Welsh names point to Germanic ethnicity is OR if it doesn't come from Morris' book; and if it does come from that book, it lacks reliabilty and value. The Age of Arthur is not a historical source, and has long been disparaged by reputable historians. See, for example:

D. P. Kirby and J. E. C. Williams, "Review of The Age of Arthur", Studia Celtica, 10-11 (1975-6), pp. 454 – 486; "an outwardly impressive piece of scholarship", it went on to argue that this apparent scholarship "crumbles upon inspection into a tangled tissue of fact and fantasy which is both misleading and misguided".

Additionally, Tewdrig did not "more likely" live in the 5th century ... that was the era of the Anglo-Saxon settlement in the east and south of Britain, and encroachments into southeastern Wales (under Mercian auspices) came later. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 20:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Not according to Gildas. His account of the "Revolt of the Saxons" has Britain burning from coast to coast. Besides, all that is recorded concerning the life of Tewdrig was written over 600 years after his alleged lifetime, the political and military elements of his time may have been greatly mutated in the course of the centuries. Urselius (talk) 10:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

So are you directly answering Ghmyrtle's question above, about the origin of the name? Or are you assuming that historical inaccuracy must also mean etymological inaccuracy? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

This book by Morris is not a valid source of information, and I removed the material attributed to it, providing one example of a review of the book by reputable historians. Inserting a made-up etymology is no more historical if done by Morris than if done by Geoffrey of Monmouth. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 20:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Poor old Geoff. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Yet the origins of the Welsh prince's name from Theoderic, an undoubted Gothic or at least Germanic name, remains. That it sits there pregnant with the need for comment is an indictment on all the editors who have ignored it. I speak as someone who has forcefully upheld the Celtic origins of the names of some Anglo-Saxon kings and saints - Cerdic, Ceawlin, Penda and Chad - if the boot is on the other foot the treatment in articles should be the same. Urselius (talk) 07:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it sits there "pregnant with the need for comment", and if there are no sources supporting it, there is no blame attached to other editors. If you have reliable sources, please add them. If you think the comment should be removed as unsourced or just plain wrong, please do so. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

North American Journal of Welsh Studies Vol 8 (2013) Maurice, Son of Theodoric: Welsh Kings and the Mediterranean World AD550-650 Philip Jenkins. On pages 4 and 5 the author states that the name is indisputably Germanic and proposes a North British or Breton origin for Tewdrig, Noting that Theodoric was a Bernician royal name and that the Breton king Budic had a son called Theuderic. How is that? Urselius (talk) 11:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't look good. Please have another read of the article, and then recall reading an article by an acknowledged authority (eg, any of the articles in Davies' Wales in the Early Middle Ages), and decide if they both belong in the category of academic scholarship, or if Jenkins' article owes more to the style of the discredited Age of Arthur than to scholarly research. It does seem that Jenkins' article belongs in the category of Age of Arthur (which makes the same assertion of a Gothic origin for the name of Tewdrig), throwing out opinions as if they were facts, weaving those speculations and historical references into a storyline perhaps suitable for the "popular readership", but certainly not suitable as a serious reference. For the items you specifically mention:

• On page 4 Jenkins says "The name Theodoric was rare in medieval Wales, and was obviously Germanic." That is not to say that Tewdrig is a form of Theodoric.
• On page 5 he says "In the mid-sixth century, the far west of Brittany was ruled by a chieftain with the impeccably Celtic name of Budic, who had a son named Theuderic." That is not to say that Tewdrig is a form of Theordoric.
• Also on page 5: "Like his Bernician namesake, that is another aristocratic or royal Theodoric in roughly the right time and place to become the father of our Meurig." His citing of Gregory of Tours at this statement does not support the assertion that Tewdrig is a form of Theodoric.

Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 21:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

It seems to me that Tewdrig is exactly paralleled by Rhodri being derived from the Germanic Roderick. Also the Welsh treatment of the Germanic ending -ric (meaning "ruler") in the transformation of Theodoric to Tewdrig is identical to that of the name of the West-Saxon king Cynric, ie. Cynwrig. By no means are all historic Brittonic or Welsh personal names of Celtic origin. I get the same, dare I say sclerotic, views of Dark Age name origin the other way round - "Cerdic is Germanic name because Cerdic was the ancestor of the dynasty of a Germanic kingdom" - whereas the name Cerdic has almost exact parallels in the form of the names of two recorded British kings (Ceretic).

All of your bullet points are just sophistry - it is obvious from reading the whole article that Tewdrig = Theodoric in the view of the author. If this was not so, what would the subject of the article be? The whole article is about Meurig (Mauricius) and his father Tewdrig (Theodoric), both sub-Roman kings in South Wales.

No, you cannot get away with guilt by association. Merely asserting that the author seems to be "similar to Morris", which is just your opinion, carries no weight. The article is published in a perfectly reputable specialist academic journal, which is sponsored by a university, also, the author is a professor of history - a professional historian with an Oxbridge education and he is Welsh. Answer this, if you can, why would the Latin version of Tewdrig be Theoderic when Theoderic is not Latin but Germanic? - when a simple Latinisation of Tewdrig would be "Teudricus". It strikes me that the Latinist clergy who recorded the name knew that Tewdrig did derive from Theoderic.

I would like to put the boot on the other foot. I have provided a derivation of the name Tewdrig from a Germanic name Theodoric, meaning "folk-ruler", with a very respectable source. If Tewdrig is Welsh name, please provide evidence of the derivation with a similarly respectable reference. If you can do this, then we can have both possible derivations in the article. Urselius (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Urselius, so many points to address. Trying to start on a positive note: yes, the characterisation that Jenkins' article reads like Age of Arthur is no more than my opinion. And yes, the article is about Meurig, but you are using it to assert that Tewdrig is a form of Theodoric, and that is the issue here; calling my bullet points "sophistry" is inaccurate: you yourself cited those pages (in your note above)—I merely quoted the text and noted that they do not support the assertion that Tewdrig is a form of Theodoric. Again, that is the issue here.

Moving on to address your other etymological comments (please read them as conversational, no argument is intended; this is not a scholarly or academic musing and I'm not a fan of the "popular etymology" in which I now seem to be engaging):

• As for seeing later references to Tewdrig by the name Theodoric: it was the custom for writers (ie, clergy) to use Christian-derived names only, so that foreign names are assigned a phonetically similar Christian name. The "Latinist clergy" (your words) would only write Christian names for Christians (and Tewdrig was indeed a Christian), and would assign one when the subject had a foreign-sounding name. The custom survives to modern times outside of a religious context, eg in Latin America.
• the -ric ending ... I've seen it asserted more frequently that it is of Celtic origin (-rix, cf Latin rex), and later adopted by western Germanic peoples as their societies became more hierarchical. Perhaps more likely it was in the Germanic vocabulary all along but was little-used. The egalitarian nature of western Germanic society is well attested, and noted by modern authors (eg, Barbara Yorke) as well as ancient ones (eg, Tacitus referred to Frisian leaders who met Emperor Nero as kings but added the telling qualification "so far as the Germans are under kings"). For a view of the hyper-hierarchy of Celtic society, take a look at the Laws of Hywel Dda and the high value it places on patrician origins.
• Ceretic and its variations ... this seems to be an evolution of the Brythonic name with the Latinised form Caratacus (Welsh Caradog). The names of admired people (including family forenames and surnames) tend to percolate repeatedly over the generations in Welsh/Scottish/Cornish/etc families, though the spellings may vary over time.
• I think that rhod is generally translated as "wheel" or "orb", in the sense of something/someone around which everything is defined; so for a name like Rhodri (widely translated as Wheel King), the assertion of Welsh (not Germanic Roderick) origin looks valid (rhod + rhi).

Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 18:33, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I quote from the article:

"In early Wales, he was remembered as Mouric ap Teudric, but the name would properly be rendered as Maurice son of Theodoric, a curious mixture of Graeco-Roman and Germanic elements. The name has attracted attention before. Leslie Alcock once suggested that the Germanic elements at the important fortified site of Dinas Powys might be associated with some kind of intrusive dynasty, represented by names like "Theodoric.""

That has dealt with your objection about the author not saying Tewrdig = Theodoric. And of course Teudric and Tewdrig are entirely cognate, Welsh has undergone many sound and spelling shifts. I suppose that Leslie Alcock is not a bona-fide academic expert in your opinion either.

The number of recognised saints with Celtic names is legion = Winwalloe, Dyfrig, Kentigern, Chad, Tydfil, Cynedd, Gwynllw etc. The difference of these saints to Tewdrig is that they did not have a Germanic-derived name in a Cymricised form, so their names were not mutated on their recognition as orthodox saints in the Latin tradition.

Again I have provided a name derivation with a perfectly legitimate and respectable reference to back it up, kindly do the same. Urselius (talk) 19:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

We (myself, at least) don't know the origin of the name Tewdrig. If it derives from Theodoric, then so be it (I, for one, will be pleased to know it, whatever its origins). But let's have the word of a qualified etymologist either directly or by reliable reference. We need a reference from someone who is qualified in the field of etymology. We don't have that yet, and I'm hoping that you will agree on that point.

A capable etymologist will discuss how Theodoric evolves into Tewdrig, and a reliable source will cite a competent etymology when making the assertion. Jenkins does not do this. PS - Alcock's acknowledged field is archaeology and interpretation (I don't think he claims authority in early medieval Welsh etymology), and citing a passing comment by him does not support the assertion that Tewdrig is a form of Theodoric, any more than does Jenkins' citation of Gregory of Tours.

So no, a passing comment in Jenkins that "the name would properly be rendered as Maurice son of Theodoric", unreferenced, and made without any claim or credentials to being a qualified etymologist (preferably in early medieval Welsh), does not address the issue of whether Tewdrig is a form of Theodoric.

So there is still no reliable reference for saying that Tewdrig is a form of Theodoric. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Going back to first principles, Wikipedia articles should aim to be encyclopaedic, therefore, if a name origin is to be found in the relevant literature, and at least three such instances have been found - Morris, Jenkins and Alcock, then it should find a place in the article. Your objections are irrelevant, the matter is out there and whether the etymology is right or wrong it needs comment in the article. The most that can be conceded on this point is to insert the phrase "Some scholars consider ..." If you can find an alternative etymology, backed by credible sources, then that should also be incorporated into the article. A Wikipedia article needs to reflect the available scholarship and not one person's opinion, or one person's selective editing of the sources.

The sound shifts and other changes that took place in the transformation of Brythonic to Old Welsh were radical; Maglocunus becomes Maelgwn, Cuneglassus becomes Cynglas, Caratacus becomes Ceretic, Theodorus becomes (eventually) Tudor, the transformation of Theodoric to Tewdrig is entirely consistent. Your desire to have a specialist Welsh etymologist consider the point is unrealistic, a fact I suspect you are aware of, there are no definite truths to be found and this article simply needs to reflect the scholarship available. Indeed by asserting a Welsh etymology for Tewdrig you are, in effect, peddling primary research - which is a big no-no on Wikipedia. BTW Jenkins is a linguist as well as a historian having a Cambridge double first–class honours in both History and Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic Studies. He would have studied the Medieval Welsh Language, presumably to a reasonable proficiency, in light of his degree class. Urselius (talk) 09:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I've moved the sentences about the origin of the name from the very start of the article to the main text, simply to avoid according the issue excessive weight. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:21, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Entirely sensible. Urselius (talk) 11:25, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Good fix, Ghmyrtle. And Urselius' recent addition of "some scholars consider ..." was a constructive step towards resolution. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 16:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Tewdrig's burial and death date

I came across "Early medieval ecclesiastical sites in southeast Wales, Desk-based assessment", April 2003, by Edith Evans ... found it on the web, so it should be generally available. It's prep-work for excavation and contains facts/factoids relevant to excavation objectives. There are a number of items relevant to the original church at Mathern, and I'm hoping that I can find a more recent followup. For now, the 2 things that pop out are

• She notes (page 13) that stone coffins were not used in Wales in this era, so the coffin containing Tewdrig's remains must belong to some later medieval date and person.
• The disparate factoids on several pages about the original church combine to suggest an approximate date for Tewdrig's death (ie, it was probably built no too long after his death). More info would be welcome here.

Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 16:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)