Yn ystod hanner cyntaf yr 20fed ganrif roedd ysgolheigion yn credu mai gweddillion dryslyd hen fytholeg oedd y Pedair Cainc. Doedd Syr Ifor Williams, un o gewri’r cyfnod, ddim gwahanol yn hynny chwaith. Tybiodd mai straeon am Pryderi oedd y Pedair Cainc yn wreiddiol, yr unig gymeriad i ymddangos ym mhob cainc. Yn ei ragymadrodd i’w olygiad o destun Llyfr Gwyn Rhydderch, dangosodd mai un o ystyron canoloesol y term mabinogi oedd ‘campau ieuenctid’. Os felly, efallai mai chwedlau’n cofnodi campau ieuenctid Pryderi oedd y ceinciau gwreiddiol, ond dros amser, wrth i’r chwedlau gael eu trosglwyddo o genhedlaeth i genhedlaeth, cawsant eu cymysgu gyda chwedlau eraill o du allan i gylch gwreiddiol Pryderi. Mae’n ddamcaniaeth ddeniadol, ond efallai nad ydyw’n rhoi’r darlun cyflawn i ni.
Roedd nifer o gyfoeswyr Ifor Williams yn coleddu’r un farn ag ef, er enghraifft yr ysgolhaig a’r bardd W.J. Gruffydd. Yn ystod ei yrfa hir cyhoeddodd W.J. Gruffydd nifer o astudiaethau manwl ar y Pedair Cainc gan geisio olrhain esblygiad y chwedlau yn ôl i’w ffynonellau yn y traddodiad llafar. Daeth o hyd i fotiffau tebyg mewn chwedlau canoloesol eraill, a rhai Gwyddelig yn arbennig, oedd yn awgrymu llinach posibl i’r ceinciau ysgrifenedig. Yn fras, roedd W.J. Gruffydd yn ceisio ail-lunio mytholeg goll. Ymysg gweddillion hen adfail, chwiliodd am gynllun y deml wreiddiol. Ceisiodd ddirnad rhesymeg wreiddiol y naratif, yr hen ystyr a ddifethwyd gan ymyrraeth cenedlaethau o gyfarwyddiaid a chopïwyr anwybodus.
Erbyn ail hanner yr 20fed ganrif roedd y consensws academaidd wedi troi yn erbyn W.J. Gruffydd. Er bod llawer o’i dystiolaeth yn ddefnyddiol, gwelodd llawer o feirniaid nad oedd ei gasgliadau’n llawer gwell na rhagdybiaethau. Yng ngeiriau Brynley F. Roberts:
“Llwyddodd dadansoddiad Gruffydd i ddangos yn eglur pa ddefnyddiau sydd yn y Pedair Cainc, ond rhaid amau a fodolai’r adeiledd mawreddog cywrain a gynigiai y tu allan i’w feddwl ei hun.” Brynley F. Roberts, Rhagymadrodd, Y Mabinogion, Dafydd a Rhiannon Ifans, xviii
Yn ddiweddarach, dywedodd Sioned Davies rhywbeth tebyg
“. . . , y farn gyffredinol bellach yw bod dychymyg Gruffydd wedi mynd yn rhemp ac nad oes sail gadarn i’w ddamcaniaethau.” Sioned Davies, Crefft y Cyfarwydd, 49.
Ond dim ond un ochr i’r stori ydi hon, ac er mor andwyol oedd i’w yrfa academaidd, yn y pen draw efallai mai ei ddychymyg oedd un o’i ddoniau mwyaf. Ynghyd â bod yn ddarlithydd prifysgol, roedd Gruffydd hefyd yn fardd, ac nid rhyw rigymwr dibwys chwaith. Os tanseiliwyd ei wrthrychedd academaidd gan ei ddychymyg bywiog, rhoddodd iddo awen rymus. Gadawodd ar ei ôl rhai o gerddi gorau’r 20fed ganrif, nid y peth hawsaf yn y byd i’w gyflawni wrth ystyried pa mor niferus mae beirdd o athrylith ymysg y Cymry. Mae un o’i gerddi gorau, Y Tlawd Hwn, yn dweud llawer am ei berthynas gyda chwedloniaeth Gymreig:
Y Tlawd Hwn
Am fod rhyw anesmwythyd yn y gwynt, A sŵn hen wylo yng nghuriadau’r glaw, Ac eco’r lleddf adfydus odlau gynt Yn tiwnio drwy ei enaid yn ddi-daw, A thrymru cefnfor pell ar noson lonydd Yn traethu rhin y cenedlaethau coll, A thrydar yr afonydd Yn deffro ing y dioddefiannau oll, – Aeth hwn fel mudan i ryw rith dawelwch, a chiliodd ei gymrodyr un ac un, A’i adel yntau yn ei fawr ddirgelwch I wrando’r lleisiau dieithr wrtho’i hun.
Gwelodd hwn harddwch lle bu’i frodyr ef Yn galw melltith Duw ar aflan fyd; Gwrthododd hwn eu llwybrau hwy i nef Am atsain ansylweddol bibau hud A murmur gwenyn Arawn o winllannau Yn drwm dan wlith y mêl ar lawr y glyn, A neithdar cudd drigfannau Magwyrydd aur Caer Siddi ar y bryn. A chyn cael bedd, cadd eistedd wrth y gwleddoedd A llesmair wrando anweledig gôr Adar Rhiannon yn y perl gynteddoedd Sy’n agor ar yr hen anghofus fôr.
Clywir yma Gruffydd yn disgrifio’i berthynas gyda’i chwedloniaeth frodorol. Iddo ef mae’n dirwedd elfennol a chysegredig, cyfrin a diamser. Mae’n fyd arall sy’n cyffwrdd rhywsut â’r byd hwn. Mae’n amlwg cafodd Gruffydd ei gyfareddu gan chwedlau ei draddodiad brodorol, i’r fath raddau fel iddo bortreadu ei hun yn encilio i fyw yn y byd arall hwnnw. Drwy astudio testunau canoloesol fel rhan o’i ymchwil academaidd, cafodd ei drwytho yn y testunau hynafol hyn; rhoddwyd cyfle iddo yfed yn ddwfn o ffynhonnau’r arallfyd rhyfeddol hwnnw a etifeddodd drwy ei iaith a’i ddiwylliant. Credaf fod profiad W.J. Gruffydd yn dadlennu un o nodweddion pwysicaf ein chwedloniaeth a’n traddodiad barddol.
Os ydi barddoniaeth orau Gruffydd yn enghraifft o beth sy’n digwydd pan mae dychymyg bardd yn cael ei danio gan ei fytholeg frodorol, nid rhyfedd fod beirdd Cymraeg yr Oesoedd Canol wedi cael eu denu’n gyson at yr un deunydd. Roedd yr ysgolion barddol Cymreig yn gyfrifol am greu catalogau hirfaith o chwedlau brodorol o’r enw’r trioedd, ac mae’n debyg ei bod hi wedi bod yn ofynnol i brentisiaid barddol ddysgu nid yn unig y trioedd eu hunain, ond y chwedlau y cyfeirient atynt hefyd. Byddai nifer o feirdd yn sicr wedi mynd cam ymhellach, gan eu hadrodd neu eu darllen yn gyhoeddus. Byddai nifer o’r rheiny a drwythwyd yn eu chwedlau brodorol wedi cael eu symbylu yn yr un modd â Gruffydd. Fel sbardun creadigol, mae’n amlwg pa fath o effaith byddai’r deunydd yma’n ei gael ar fardd parod a galluog. Er na allwn ni dderbyn ei gasgliadau academaidd, mae’n eironig mai yng ngwaith creadigol W.J. Gruffydd y cawn un o’r arwyddion egluraf o effaith y chwedlau hyn.
According to Marged Haycock, the Book of Taliesin poem ‘Angar Kyfundawt’ could very well have been written by Llywarch ap Llywelyn (for a full explanation see her introduction to her edition of The Legendary Poems from the Book of Taliesin). The similarites between Llywarch’s more formal court poetry and a number of poems in the Book at least place him closer to the text than any other bard of his period. Although Marged Haycock largely makes the association based on similarities in vocabulary and word combinations, there is also the suggestion of a conceptual similarity, not only with Llywarch, but also with his old master, Cynddelw. This conceptual similarity is of course with regards to the use of dwfn and its counterpart Annwfn as signifying a mythical dimension implied within mundane reality.
As with the majority of the other legendary poems, ‘Angar Kyfundawt’ is a dramatic piece that was likely to have been performed in the voice and persona of the mythical Taliesin; before uttering a word, this in itself would signal that the performer was evoking the mythical depths. The explicit references to ‘the deep’ largely corroborate what’s already been covered in previous posts, such as . . .
Awen a ganaf,
o dwfyn ys dygaf.
I sing awen,
I bring it forth from the depth.
Another section describes in detail what is only suggested in other poems:
Ef a’e rin rodes
seith vgein ogyruen
yssyd yn awen;
wyth vgein o pop vgein
euyd yn vn.
Yn Annwyfn y diwyth,
yn Annwfyn y gorwyth,
yn Annwfyn is eluyd,
yn awyr uch eluyd.
He [God] with his miracle
bestowed immeasurable awen;
seven score ogyrfen
there is in awen,
and eight score of every score
in each one.
In Annwfn he ranged them,
in Annwfn he made them,
in Annwfn below the earth,
in the air above the earth.
Here the legendary Taliesin describes how God created the immeasurable aspects or divisions (ogyrfen) of awen and set them out in Annwfn. The poet unambiguously names Annwfn as the place where awen is created, set out in all its varieties, and more importantly where it is found, the depth from which it rises. This makes sense if we again define Annwfn as the mythical realm, that is the place from which all symbolic, mythic and idealised forms arise. In the Four Branches, Annwfn is the realm that is somehow within Dyfed, and is the place where Pwyll experiences ideal or perfected forms of behaviour.
This also suggests a possible interpretation for the difficult last line in the above excerpt, ‘in the air above the earth’. There are two possible interpretations: first of all that the poem here refers back to awen, and that awen is also found in the air above the earth as well as being arranged by God in the depths; a possible interpretation considering the etymological link between awen and breath / air.
The second interpretation is that the whole sequence is talking about Annwfn and therefore Annwfn is here described as not only being in the earth bellow but also in the air above. It would be reasonable to assume that this is a metaphorical way of saying ‘in all places, above and bellow’ just as Llywarch uses dwfn a bais in the previous post. This interpretation suggests Annwfn is in all things, latent in the whole of God’s creation, not just bellow the earth. In this regard, the meaning of the name Annwfn shouldn’t be taken literally but symbolically; describing it as being bellow ground is simply a storybook metaphor for the more nuanced concept of ‘the world within the world’.
But these are not the only references to ‘the deep’ that we find in ‘Angar Kyfundawt’. If anything, the whole poem is laced with references to this concept, usually implied in double meaning, or ‘meanings within meanings’ which as a feature itself seems to symbolise ‘the world within the world’. In the next few posts I’ll take a more detailed look at these other examples.
It has been suggested that Llywarch ap Llywelyn (fl. 1173-1220), or Prydydd y Moch as he is more commonly known, spent at least part of his apprenticeship under the tutelage of Cynddelw Brydydd Mawr. If this is true then we would expect to find some similarity in their work, and indeed such similarities can be seen in some instances. These include similar alliterations and rhymes, as well as common concepts, one of which is the concept of dwfn as initially outlined in the previous posts.
The first example from Llywarch’s work is in reference to himself:
Crist fab Mair a’m pair o’m pedwar — defnydd
Dofn awen ddiarchar.
Christ son of Mary caused me from my four materials,
Deep, powerful awen.
As usual, there are different meanings implied here, the most obvious being the double meaning of the second line, which signifies not only that Christ caused Llywarch to have a deep, powerful awen, but also that this act of miraculous creation testifies to Christ’s own deep and powerful awen.
Using the feminine form of dwfn as an adjective to describe awen is one of many similarities that Llywarch shares with Cynddelw, and Llywarch’s use offers us further insights into this concept. Again the interpretations presented here are based on alternative readings of the manuscript text. In preparing modern editions of these poems, it is an editor’s prerogative to punctuate the text according to the meaning they interpret. In the Beirdd y Tywysogion series the editors have chosen to punctuate a line by Llywarch in the following way:
Llyw bydoedd lled byd, dwfn a bas, . . .
. . . which then gives the following in translation . . .
Leader of hosts across the world, in deep and shallow seas, . . .
But removing the comma in the second third of the line and instead opting for the more basic meaning of dwfn, that is simply ‘depth’, gives the following in translation . . .
Leader of hosts across the world, deep and shallow . . .
. . . that is treating deep and shallow as adjectives that describe the world. This reading implies Llywarch considered the world to have deep and shallow aspects, just as the concepts of Annwfn and deep awen imply in Cynddelw’s work.
We find the same coupling of deep and shallow in another of Llywarch’s poems:
Gallas arglwyddwas, aerglais – Lywelyn,
Lewenydd dwfn a bais,
Gwenddydd amrywdud Emrais,
Gwynedd adrysedd, i drais.
The young lord took, Llywelyn who wounds in battle,
Deep and shallow joy,
The blessed land of the numerous people of Emrys,
The wonder of Gwynedd, through might.
If we follow the editor’s punctation it is the joy of Llywelyn’s victorious nature that has deep and shallow aspects.
Regardless of which punctuation we choose to follow in the above example, the second line will remain ambiguous unless we provide a better interpretation of what deep and shallow mean. It appears that at least in Llywarch’s work he uses both words together to imply ‘on all levels’, that is on both profound and mundane levels: in the mysterious, mythic depths and in the day-to-day shallows.
Sometimes in Gogynfeirdd poetry the word dwfn is used to describe awen, the sacred breath of bardic inspiration; when dwfn is used as an adjective in this way modern editors usually give it the meaning ‘profound’. But as in the previous post, it mustn’t be forgotten that dwfn also means ‘deep’. For example, in a poem by Cynddelw we find the following line:
Yn ail awen ddofn o ddwfn gofiain, . . .
. . . which modern editors interpret as meaning[The patron] is a reflection of the profound awen of profound thoughts, . . .
. . . but could quite as easily be interpreted as meaning[The patron] is a reflection of the deep awen of deep thoughts, . . .
So what’s the real difference between these two interpretations?
First of all we need to unpack the line a little. As with most heroic poetry, the Gogynfeirdd almost always depicted their patrons as the perfect, ideal hero; in fact any personal characteristics were largely ignored in favour of more general, heroic ones. The patron became a vehicle for the heroic ideals that the bardic tradition wished to promote.
This means that the awen of the Gogynfeirdd was that of heroic poetry – a worthy patron inspired them to express the heroic ideals that were so central to their way of life. It was this particular awen that the patron was reflecting in this instance.
But what does ‘deep’ mean in this context? Why is the patron a reflection of deep awen? There is the surface meaning of ‘profound’, but once again here we have a suggestion of this otherworldly dwfn, a hint of Annwfn. One thing that we can assume from the above quote is that Cynddelw believed this deeper dimension of inspiration was the space in which the perfect heroic ideal was found, a concept not a million miles away from a symbolic interpretation of the first branch of the Mabinogi.
In the third part of the line (‘. . . of deep thoughts’) there is a clear association made between this otherworldly dwfn and ‘deep’ thoughts. Its easy to associate deep inspiration with deep thinking and again ‘profound’ fits nicely as a surface meaning. But carrying through the subtext of this otherworldly dwfn, Cynddelw may also be suggesting this deeper dimension to be at least partly synonymous with the mind.
All this can either be taken as purely metaphorical or as a suggestion of the kind of metaphysical framework Cynddelw worked in as a chief bard. In another of his poems, Cynddelw states that his song, his awen, comes from this deep place:
. . . canwyf o ddwfn, o ddofn awen, . . .
. . . I sing from the depth, from the deep awen, . . .
Again, what is being stressed here is the accessibility of this deep space. Annwfn may not be so otherworldly as to be inaccessible. Awen connects this surface realm with the ideal depths of reality, providing the bard not only with a source of inspiration but, in the context of praise singing, also a source of wisdom and judgment.
Cynddelw’s multilayered use of dwfn, not only as an adjective and a noun but also as a concept, fits in with what we already know about the Welsh bardic tradition’s conception of divine inspiration. Cynddelw suggests that Annwfn and the synonymous dwfn offers a deepening of this world’s perspectives, and that awen arises from this place carrying with it the impressions of ideal forms.
In the next few posts I’ll examine the work of other Gogynfeirdd poets to further expand our understanding of what they meant by Annwfn, dwfn and awen.
In the Beirdd y Tywysogion series, the editors have interpreted a line by Cynddelw in the following way:
In Annwfn, in the world, in the sea – . . .
This is a reasonable interpretation, but there are alternatives that could suggest a lot more to us about what court bards such as Cynddelw thought about Annwfn, the traditional Welsh otherworld. The actual line in the original Welsh reads . . .
Yn Annwfn, yn nwfn, yn nyfnder – . . .
If we begin with the second part of the line, the word dwfn (mutated here to ‘yn nwfn’) means ‘world’, the meaning given in the first quoted line above; but dwfn also meant ‘deep’ in middle Welsh. This is important and not to be overlooked; as we shall see there are many uses of dwfn in this sense, some of which relate directly to the concept of Annwfn and awen (see further posts on this). The second element in Annwfn is of course this very same dwfn, and rhyming both words was no accident – a master craftsman such as Cynddelw would have been very aware of the many connotations he was putting into play with such ornamentation.
In the third part of the line, dyfnder also means something similar to dwfn, literally ‘depth’, and is often used as a name for the depths of the sea. Again, Cynddelw would have understood the connection between Annwfn, dwfn and dyfnder, and as well as creating a cynghanedd sain, these three words also chime in meaning, conveying the sense of a deep, profound space. Annwfn in later folk lore is understood as being under the earth, a metaphorical description that retained a hint of this original meaning.
If we reinterpret the line stressing the other meanings implied it gives a whole new reading to this section of Cynddelw’s poem:
Hydr yd gerdd fy ngherdd yng nghyflawnder
I gyflawn foli rhi rhwy dirper,
Yn urddiant foliant fal yd glywer,
Yn awen barawd awdl burwawd bêr;
Yn Annwfn, yn nwfn, yn nyfnder – yd farn,
Nid beirdd a’i dadfarn, bardd a’i dadfer.
Powerfully does my song go forth in completeness
To praise fully the king that deserves it,
In renowned praise full of dignity,
With ready awen in an ode of fair, pure poetry;
In Annwfn, in the deep, in the depth, it judges,
Other bards do not impoverish it, it is this bard that declaims it!
Cynddelw’s song judges the patron, and does so in Annwfn, which, according to my alternative reading is ‘the deep’, and ‘the depth’. This supports the idea that Annwfn is a deep place, and gives us another piece of information about Cynddelw’s conception of Annwfn, that being it is from this deep place that the bard’s judgment arises. This lawful or ethical aspect of Annwfn is also seen in the first part of the first branch of the Mabinogi, and Cynddelw is very likely referring to the same idea here. With this association in place, we can now expand on some of the other occurrences of dwfn in Gogynfeirdd poetry.
This audio clip is from a course on The Welsh Bardic Tradition, held at Aberystwyth University, alongside an excerpt from the course notes. It looks at the life and early work of the greatest of the Gogynfeirdd, Cynddelw Brydydd Mawr during the time of the fall of the Kingdom of Powys.
This audio clip is from a course on The Welsh Bardic Tradition, held at Aberystwyth University, alongside an excerpt from the course notes. It summarises a discussion on a sequence of anonymous medieval gnomic stanzas from around 1100.
This audio clip is from a course on The Welsh Bardic Tradition, held at Aberystwyth University, alongside an excerpt from the course notes. It covers a medieval praise poem written around 1100 to Cuhelyn Fardd, a powerful nobleman and bard from South Western Wales. The poem itself reveals much about early bardic culture and custom in medieval Wales.
Throughout the second half of the twelfth century, Cynddelw Brydydd Mawr served the most powerful Welsh princes as a court bard. He was paid generously by these aristocrats in the hope that his skillful praise poetry would portray them as legendary heroes, and not only to their contemporaries. Even though its likely that political matters, including the ever-present threat of attack, was the priority for these warlords, its likely they kept one eye on the good name of their lineage. In this respect, Cynddelw’s patrons relied upon him to commemorate them in such an elegant and majestic way so as to ensure their names would survive the oblivion of the centuries. Many of these awdlau,1 praises and laments, have survived to the present day, which is testimony in itself that Cynddelw succeeded in safeguarding the names of his patrons throughout the centuries.
But this simple fact hides a complex reality. Without mentioning the effort, the devotion and the unique talent that was responsible for such sublime verse, there were many factors beyond the control of the court bards that were equally responsible for the longevity of their poems. Cynddelw Brydydd Mawr did not work in a vacuum: he was part of a tradition, and when employing him as a court bard his patron was also calling upon the power of that tradition. In this sense, Cynddelw was far more than an individual bard, he was a vessel and a vehicle for the traditional idealism, mythology and ritual of his nation, as well as being a master of the ancient art and craft of the bardic declamation. By seeing him in this light, we can begin to reveal the wider context of the period he lived in, eight hundred and fifty years ago.
Cynddelw succeeded in drawing together the myriad threads of his tradition and weaving them together into one wondrous tapestry – a kind of ritual gown for his own use. He mastered the complex network of mythological figures and their respective tales, alongside the authoritative voices of the Hengerdd.2 Within him were located centuries of cultural development, and he gave voice to all these wondrous and ancient cultural artifacts through his public persona – the regal figure of the court bard. When he declaimed his odes before the court, in his voice the voices of Aneirin, Taliesin and Myrddin could be heard. Through him his audience touched their strange and heroic past, reliving the great histories of their forefathers. What’s more, he presented these mythical heroes as ideals by which to live, as mediums for the ancient principles of the Welsh aristocracy. Regardless of how much of this actually rubbed off on the military elite, in the ritual life of the court he was the old druid giving council to the king, and implied in that was the claim that just like Taliesin before him, he could save his patron from any missfortune through his learning, his wisdom and his mystical abilities. In this respect, it is easy to see how the court bard was the respectable descendant of the old tribal bard. As the court poets of Cynddelw’s period, that is the period of the Gogynfeirdd,3 portrayed themselves as descendants of the Cynfeirdd,4 it is natural to see the tribal bard in the form of Taliesin or Aneirin as an integral part of the court bard’s public persona.
As a result, this persona, that shines so brightly in the odes of Cynddelw, Prydydd y Moch and many other bards of the tradition, can be considred a dramatic expression of the old wise man archetype. There are many historic examples of this figure – in Geofrey of Monmouth’s ‘Merlin’ or in the stories of the old hermits of the early Church. Jung’s name for this particular archetype is the senex,5 and the concept was adopted by later scholars, for example Joseph Campbell:
. . . the Wise Old Man of the myths and fairy tales whose words assist the hero through the trials and terrors of the weird adventure. He is the one who appears and points to the magic shining sword that will kill the dragon-terror, tells of the waiting bride and the castle of many treasures, applies healing balm to the almost fatal wounds, and finally dismisses the conqueror, back into the world of normal life, following the great adventure into the enchanted night.6
Considering Cynddelw’s self-portrayal as the mythical wise old druid, it is easy to locate his dramatic persona in the same archetypal lineage. It would be fair to say that his effectiveness as a court bard would have depended to some extent on his ability to portray himself as such. It is not suprising that the same awareness of the power of myth is seen in the works of the Gogynfeirdd as it is in the works of modern psychologists. Its likely that both appreciated the ability of myth and ideal to serve various moral objectives, including the attempted transformation of the individual and the community.7
Of course, as has already been noted by Jung, only in the last two centuries did Western intelectuals begin approaching myth as an area of scholarly research. As far as we know, it is only comparatively recently that there has been a structured approach to the study of myths and the psychological meanings expressed within them. Certainly there is no obvious evidence to suggest that the Gogynfeirdd treated myth in such an analytical way. But we can see that many modern psychologists and anthropologists follow Jung in his fundamental view that there is a very practical relationship between myth, ritual and the psychological evolution of humanity. For example, Joseph Campbell again:
It has always been the prime function of mythology and rite to supply the symbols that carry the human spirit forward, in counteraction to those other constant human fantasies that tend to tie it back.8
Some decades later we see the anthropologist Victor Turner taking on the same concept. For him, public rituals, particularly rituals which mark periods of transition, such as the public declamation of a praise poem in honour of a brave young man, may suggest the fundamental values of communal life as expressed in symbolic terms:
. . . I wish to show that where transition in space-time is ritualized, how it is ritualized, . . . gives us clues not only to the cherished values of the society that performs the rituals, but also to the nature of human sociality itself transcending particular cultural forms.9
Like Campbell,10 Turner believed that public ritual can provide a kind of psychological orientation for the benefit of those taking part by attempting to foster social equilibrium where there is potential or actual conflict.11 In the context of a brave young man returning from a horific battle, this may be to avoid dangerous arrogance, and foster healthy pride. We can suppose, therefore, that the role of the court bard was far more involved than simply composing poetry. Its likely that he was also at times a master of ceremonies, responsible for bringing the community (the old tribe) together on special occasions, like victory in battle or the death of a chief. It would be easy to identify him as a public figure, and in light of that it would have been natural for him to adopt dramatic techniques that supported his public performances. It is the acknowledgement of this dramatic element in this medieval poetry which is the first step in trying to better understand the ruitual context of a Gogynfardd declaiming his song.
References by Jung, Campbell and Turner to the medieval culture of Wales are rare. But the global reach of their research has ensured their relevance to anyone wishing to explore the basic tendencies of native cultures. There is a basic similarity in the way most cultures make use of public performance as a way of getting to grips with collective mental and spiritual health. In this sense, it could be argued that one of the oldest archetypes is maybe that of the public performer itself: the entertainer, the storeyteller, the musician or the bard, those who provide a focus, who attempt to provide communal equilibrium through the medium of their performance. It is clear at least that it is through the figure of the performer all the other archetypes are mediated as dramatic characters or spiritual embodiments. The Welsh bard, in this case, can be considered as a member of a very wide family of performers that developed independently in cultures large and small all over the world.
* * *
1. ‘odes’. Long strict meter verses with chiming alliterations and rhymes; usually with
long passages, if not whole poems, on the same rhyme.
2. ‘ancient poetry’. The traditional term of the earliest Welsh poetry.
3. Otherwise known as the Poets of the Priness. Their period roughly spanning from the first half of the 11th century to the fall of the Llywelyn the Last Ruler in 1282.
4. The name given to the poets who preceded the Gogynfeirdd. Their period roughly spanning from the 6th century to the middle of the 11th.
5. C.G. Jung, The Collected Works vol. XIII (Llundain, 1967), p. 220.
6. Joseph Campbell, The Hero With A Thousand Faces (Fontana, 1993), p. 9-10.
7. Ibid. p. 10: “When we turn . . . to consider the numerous strange rituals that have been reported from the primitive tribes and great civilizations of the past, it becomes apparent that the purpose and actual effect of these was to conduct people across those difficult thresholds of transformation that demand a change in the patterns not only of conscious but also of unconscious life.”
8. Ibid. p. 11.
9. Victor Turner, ‘Variations on a Theme of Liminality’, Secular Ritual, ed. S.F. Moore and B.G. Myerhoff, (Netherlands, 1977), p. 38.
10. Campbell, The Hero With A Thousand Faces, p. 29: “It is the business of mythology . . . to reveal the specific dangers and techniques of the dark interior way from tragedy to comedy. Hence the incidents are fantastic and “unreal”: they represent psychological, not physical, triumphs. Even when the legend is of an actual historical personage, the deeds are rendered, not in lifelike, but in dreamlike figurations; for the point is not that such-and such was done on earth; the point is that, before such-and-such could be done on earth, this other, more important, primary thing had to be brought to pass within the labyrinth that we all know and visit in our dreams. The passage of the mythological hero may be overground, incidentally; fundamentally it is inward – into depths where obscure resistances are overcome, and long lost, forgotten powers are revivified, to be made available for the transfiguration of the world.”
11. Victor Turner, ‘Are there universals of performance in myth, ritual and drama?’, By Means of Performance, ed. R. Schechner, (New York, 1990), p.10.