Families of Wales, the family of Brân, is said to have brought over to the Britons the knowledge of the Faith. Brân was the father of Caractacus. He, together with his daughter-in-law, and the child and brother of Caractacus, were detained in Rome for seven years, on the release of Caractacus, as hostages. They would thus be contemporaries, in all probability, with S. Paul at Rome. While there they were

seven years a hostage for his son Caradawc, whom the Romans made prisoner through the craft and treachery of Aregwedd Fæddawg. The second was Lleurig ab Coel ab Cyllyn Sant [King Lucius?] who was called Lleufer Mawr, and built the ancient church at Llandaff, which was the first in Britain, and who gave the privileges of land, and of kindred, and of social rights, and of society, to such as were of the faith of Christ. The third was Cadwaladyr the Blessed, who gave refuge, with his lands, and with all his goods, to the believers who fled from the Saxons, without faith, and from the Aliens who would have slain them." -Triad 35, third series. Vid. also Triad 62. The Cadwaladyr referred to in this 35th Triad was the grandson of Cadfan, Prince of North Wales, who, with Bledric, Prince of Cornwall, avenged the atrocious slaughter, by the Saxons under one of their kings, Æthelfrith, of the 2000 defenceless monks of Bangor-is-y-Coed. Cadfan was buried at Llancadwaladr in the Island of Anglesea. Llancadwaladr is a charming village on the western side of Anglesea. The present church there is a fine structure, and bears many marks of an older building. It was founded by Cadwaladyr the Blessed, and bears his name. A former church, of the very early British type, was built over the remains of Cadfan. On an old slab in the doorway, now closed, opposite to the grave of Cadfan, is inscribed in old Latin characters: Catamanus, rex sapientissimus, oppimatissimus omnium regum"-" Cadfan, the wisest and richest of all Kings."

1 Caractacus arrived in Rome early in the year 51; he was captured in the spring of the previous year. He would be kept there at least two years, say till towards the end of 53. On his release his family became hostages for his good behaviour, and converted to Christianity. S. Paul may have been the instrument of their conversion. On their return to Britain they brought with them the Gospel, and converted their brethren. This is not at all impossible; nor is it impossible that the great Apostle of the Gentiles, prompted by his burning zeal for the spread of the Gospel, and as a man of culture knowing the affairs of Britain, may not have become acquainted with these captives and converted them to the Faith, and through their representations may have determined to visit Britain on his release from imprisonment.

Tacitus does not give us the names of the wife, daughter, and brother of Caractacus, nor does he mention his father. Pomponia Græcina, whom Plautius the Commander-in-chief of the Roman army in Britain had married after his triumphal return to Rome in A. D. 50-56, and who, according to Tacitus, was accused of the "externa superstitio," that is, the Christian Faith, and on this account was compelled to live apart from her hushand in privacy, is, according to many, said to be the sister of Caractacus. Linus, mentioned by Clemens Romanus as " Sanctissimus Linus Frater Claudiæ," is reputed by many to be the son of Caractacus, who was detained in Rome as a hostage. Irenæus says that he was made Bishop of the city of Rome by S. Paul and S. Peter, his successor being Anacletus, who was succeeded by Clement. The names Linus, Cletus, and Clement have from the earliest times been commemorated in this order in the Roman Liturgies.

4

Dion Cassius makes the name of Caractacus' father to be Kunobelinos, and the brother who was taken captive with him, Togodomnus. "He (Plautius) defeated first Karaktakos, and afterwards Togodumnus, the sons of Kunobelinos, who himself was dead." " This account of Dion Cassius differs on two points from the Welsh Triad, viz.: In the name of the father of Caractacus, and in that he could not have been taken to Rome, because he had died anterior to the conquest of Plautius. But it does not in any way weaken the fact of the captivity of Caractacus and his family in Rome. Here, then, we have a very strong presumption, -not direct evidence, it is true, but indirect and circumstantial, that harmonizes so many different facts drawn from different sources,-in favour of the old Welsh tradition that the family of 1 Tacitus, Annal. xiii. 20.

That he had sisters and brothers and children there remains little doubt. He had a brother whose name is given by Dion Cassius as Togodumnus. Dio. Cass. lx. 19-23. Vid. Origines Celt., pp. 393-395.

Brân,' or Kunobelinus (which may simply be his Latin name), were indeed holy, and the first bearers of the Christian Faith to their suffering brethren, who were so severely tried by war, and were the means of changing their Roman yoke into a yoke of Christ.

V.

In S. Paul's second Epistle to Timothy, written in A. D. 68, just before his death, he sends greetings from "Eubulus, and Pudens, and

Many aver

that Pudens and Linus, and Claudia." In Martial's Claudia, if not

the bearers Epigrams, addressed to one Rufus, themselves, were neverthe- written from A. D. 68-100, he mentions less closely con

nected with the the marriage of "the foreigner Clau

introduction of

the Faith to dia" with his Pudens, and praises the

Britain.

graces of a Claudia Rufina, who though sprung from the "painted Britons," had all the elegance of an Italian, and thanks the gods that she had borne children to her "Sancto Marito." Now the coincidence of the names here is striking. May they not be the same persons? The question has led many to a great deal of research on this subject, the result of which appears highly favourable to the identity of the persons in question. There are, however, certain difficulties in connection with this theory which must be borne in mind. The condition of the Christians at this time at Rome, it is said, was not favourable to their being among the best society. Renan says that S. Paul did not know the best society of Rome. But Renan is fond of legendary lore. Lightfoot also has his doubt upon the same grounds, as to the identity of the names, but has somewhat modified them in his Commentary on the Philippians. But of what did the population of Rome at this time consist? It consisted chiefly of Jews and Greeks.

3

The Jews were a numerous and powerful body in Rome at this time. They had a distinct quarter of the city assigned them; and so successful were they as traders and artisans that they exerted a powerful influence over Roman society, and from the time of Cæsar onwards were found amongst the very highest classes of Roman society. They became the favourites of Princes; were flattered by powerful Ministers; and in more than one instance moulded the characters of the Emperors. Repeated allusions to them are found in the writings of Horace and Juvenal. That they were influential in the Roman Church admits of no doubt. The list that S. Paul gives in the 16th chapter of his Epistle to the Romans is a proof of this: