David Ap Rhys, Sr. - Mythical 16th C Kingdom of South Wales

Started by Private User on Friday, November 3, 2017
Problem with this page?

Participants:

Related Projects:

Showing all 13 posts

So, well. Ok.

The son we have here on Geni for this David ap Rhys, who is called David ap Reese, Jr., is, except for the Jr. part, pretty well documented and I have no argument with him.

But the sources given for him do NOT mention parents.

And the line of parents above here is not believable.

But! This comes from a source! A Book!

The source that this line comes from is Genealogy of the Reese Family in Wales and America: From Their Arrival in America to the Present Time." It is by Miss Mary E. Reese. 1903.

https://archive.org/stream/genealogyreesef00reesgoog/genealogyreese...

Ok.

I will now explain why I fell off my chair whilst trying to read this tome.

If the author had confined herself to the Reese family in America I would be leaving her alone, (Though frankly, if I were working on the later Reese lines I would want to check her work.)

But the Reese Family in Wales part is Not OK.

Skipping all the poetic romanticism at the beginning of the book and going straight to the 3rd chapter, which gives us the line as it has been copied into Geni, let us observe the Reese Family in Wales.

We are told that the Reese family was at the siege of Londonderry. I doubt the whole family was there, but Sir David ap Rhys might well have been; the siege of Derry was 1688-1699, so he could have been there.

But. We are the told that his ancestor Sir David Reese was a lineal descendant of Lord Rhys, and married Gwellion, the daughter of Griffith Koran, King of Wales. So if we go looking for Gwenllian verch Gruffudd ap Cynan -- which I gather is what this must mean -- we get Gwenllian verch Gruffydd -- and she is indeed the daughter of one of the kings of Wales, but she lived in the 12th century and was married to,Gruffudd ap Rhys, and David ap Rhys just isn't in it. And also lived hundreds of years later.

And their son Thomas married Mawd de Brewes, who was the great great grand daughter of Beli, the Emperor of Britain. I think she means Maud de Braose, Baroness Mortimer, who was not married to Thomas Reese, or rather Thomas ap Dafydd. Also she is not the great granddaughter of Beli Mawr "The Great", {Fictitious, Mabinogion}

And HIS son, David ap Rees (why is he not Dafydd ap Thomas) was married to Gladys, the daughter of Redwallon, the king of Powys! She means Gwladys verch Rhiwallon, Queen of Deheubarth. She wasn't married to David anybody.

So, in short, the immediate ancestors of the David Reese who went to America have been cobbled together from people who,didn't know each other, and existed centuries apart. And it makes no sense. A David Reese who lived in the 18th century cannot be the great grandson of rulers of kingdoms that had long been gone by 1400.

My favorite part is the Kingdom of South Wales, which in this fairy tale existed in the 16th century. I tell you what, I do believe the Tudors would have noticed if that sort of alternate kingdom had been going on.

Anyway.

If you like you can follow the link and read lots more entertaining nonsense about the romantic and poetic ancient Welsh, who,apparently were so romantic and poetic that they obeyed not the laws of time and space, but verily, didst skip around the centuries, unfettered by actual history.

My recommendation: the entire line above the guy who went to America needs to be cut.

Some of the people actually existed, but not as they appear here.

I think it should be cut and labeled fictional, and the immigrant profile given a curators note explaining the situation.

And I am so sorry. There was a source. There was a published source. It looked good. Alas, it told lies.

Oh my-I would have to agree with you-lol....what a lot of work you put into that family line! At least you got some entertainment out of it! Your work is much appreciated!

lol

Sorry. Bad typo. The Siege of Derry was 1688-1689. It did not last 11 years.

For further pondering about this volume, I give you a couple of paragraphs from the introduction. Here, Miss Reese has been explaining why she wrote the volume, which was, mostly, to further her own knowledge of the blood running in her veins:

"She does not hope to interest many others beside
those of whom it treats. These, however, she hopes
will enjoy it, and if it shall promote among the
numerous descendants of the faraway founder of
the family a better acquaintance, a more sincere
affection, and a more worthy desire to honor an
honorable name, she will have her reward.

As imperfect as this work may prove to be, per-
haps it is better to have an imperfect sketch than
none at all. The writer has written hundreds of
letters. Very many never responded to her inter-
rogatories, and should their names not appear in
the book, they have only themselves to blame."

Well. I'm sorry that some of the Reeses never got back to her. For sure, those of you later Reeses, you should make sure that her later work isn't tarnishing current Reese history.

As to the ancient Welsh, the problems are explained. They never got back to her. Since all of them were either dead or had never existed, this is understandable. But they have only themselves to blame.

As for me, this volume has not increased my sincere affection, at least not for the member of the Reese Family who penned this. But I am not a Reese, and therefore am not part of the intended audience. So there's that.

Now you know why I get so mad at Emma Siggins White! :-D

"As to the ancient Welsh, the problems are explained. They never got back to her. Since all of them were either dead or had never existed, this is understandable. But they have only themselves to blame." lololol

Source:
The Mammoth Book of British Kings & Queens
The Complete Biographical Encyclopedia of the Kings and Queens of Britain, by Mike Ashley
Carroll & Graf Publishers, INC. New York
1st published UK Robinson Publg 1998
First Carrol & Graf edition 1998

This source agrees with all that you posted in the beginning here also.
This source doesn't even have a Dafydd/David/Dafyd(or David Reese) ap Rhys any where in this book.

The only errors I have found are the birth dates are seriously questionable. I did find a type-o on a birth year. I do like this book, most of what i have found is on the up and up from other historical resources. I just wish the author had included his sources better than he did. So I have gone on to other resources and noted their sources and made corrections accordingly.
I suppose I'll be dead before all the records in all of England have been fully transcribed. Then there were the Norman problems in Wales who had the propensity to slash and burn everything in their path in Wales.
I think most people accept that the earliest of Welsh rulers and leaders have sketchy history.
Thanks for your indepth imput. What I have in my data is in line with the issues you have addressed here.

King Pasgen ap Urien.

The Geni Welsh experts have opened up another interesting thread. Real quickly, I will say that not all sources are equal as not all manuscripts are equally representative of the true historical record.

Aside from the arguments here about David ap Rhys, Sr. and David ap Reese, Jr., which I'm not directly going to comment on, I will say that it is not only possible but probable that Gwenllian ferch Gruffydd (died 1136) (the Welsh profile in discussion here) had at least one daughter.

We know there are numerous highly regarded researchers, expert Welsh historians, and genealogists who have credited Gwenllian with daughters, basing their claims off of their analysis of contemporary documents and circumstantial evidence. Even to date, nothing has been discovered or presented (at least here with the Geni experts) or in academic circles to definitively state that she did not have any daughters.

Definitive statements work the other way around. One has to prove that she did have them.

All Geni is divided into two irreconcilable camps: Those who think that absence of evidence can be used AS evidence, and those who think that absence of evidence is merely absence of evidence.

This line is descendant nooble house David ap Thys nooble of Ulster and scotland.

Showing all 13 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion