for Iestin, received their pay and returned towards London. They had hardly departed when Iestin, flushed with his triumph, treacherously refused Eineon his daughter's hand. Eineon pursued the retreating Frenchmen, explained to them his own wrongs and the general unpopularity of Iestin, and showed how easy it would be for them to conquer Iestin's dominions, since his treason to Rhys had so much disgusted the South-Wales princes that not one would afford him succour. The Normans were easily persuaded. Eineon meanwhile organised a Welsh revolt. They jointly spoiled lestin and Morganwg, but the Normans took the rich vale for their own share and left Eineon only the mountains of Senghenydd and Miscin, while the sons of Iestin were rewarded for their acquiescence in their father's fate by the lowland lordship of Aberavon. Induced by the victory of Fitz-Hamon, other Normans seized upon Dyved, Ceredigion, Brecheiniog. Thus the treachery of Eineon put all South Wales into the hands of the foreigner.
This full and elaborate story is first found in the 'Brut y Tywysogion,' first printed in the second volume of the 'Myvyrian Archaiology,' and afterwards with a translation by Mr. Aneurin Owen for the Cambrian Archæological Association in 1863. But the original manuscript of this 'Brut' is believed not to be older than the middle of the sixteenth century, and therefore not much earlier than Powels 'History of Cambria' (1584), in which the story of the conquest of Glamorgan also appears at length, varying from the above account in only a few details. There are here added, however, long pedigrees of the descendants of the 'twelve knights,' and most critical inquirers have agreed that the fertile invention of the pedigree-makers for Glamorganshire families is the original source of the legend. But there must be some nucleus of truth and some ancient basis for the inventors to have worked upon, for the conquest of Glamorgan is undoubtedly historical, though there is no direct account of it in any earlier authority. There is nothing in itself improbable in the story of Eineon, though there are slips in detail. If he had such great connections, why did he not use them to save his native Dyved from Rhys's assault? Rhys, too, was undoubtedly slain by Bernard of Neufmarché and the conquerors of Brecheiniog. Moreover it is absurd to suppose that after doing their work the Normans would have gone home again or needed Eineon's suggestion to turn their attention to the conquest of Morganwg. Obviously the expansion of the Norman arms from Gloucester into Morganwg was as natural as that of the expansion of the Shrewsbury earldom into Powys. But the quarrels and invitations of local princes were here, as in Ireland, a determining cause of their action; and Eineon's part in the conquest is too probable and typical for us lightly to reject the whole of his history. Some Welsh families profess to be descended from Eineon (Lewys Dwnn, Heraldic Visitations of Wales, i. 29, Welsh MSS. Soc.; for a full list see Clarke, Limbus Patrum Morganiæ, p. 131 et seq.)
[Brut y Tywysogion, pp. 68-75 (Cambrian Archæological Association); Powels History of Cambria, pp. 119-27, ed. 1584, with the comments of Mr. G. T. Clark in his first paper on the 'Land of Morgan' in xxxiv. 11-39 of the Archæological Journal, and subsequently reprinted separately with the other papers on the same subject, and those of Professor Freeman in William Rufus. ii. 79-82, 613-15, note gg; cf. Norman Conquest, v. 820.]
EKINS, Sir CHARLES (1768–1855), admiral, son of Dr. Jeffery Ekins [q. v.], dean of Carlisle (1782-91), and nephew of Dr. John Ekins, dean of Salisbury (1768-1809), was born in 1768, presumably at Quainton, Buckinghamshire, of which parish his father was then rector. He entered the navy in March 1781, on board the Brunswick of 74 guns, under the command of the Hon. Keith Stewart. In the Brunswick he was present in the action on the Doggerbank on 5 Aug. 1781, and afterwards went with Captain Stewart to the Cambridge, which was one of the fleet under Lord Howe that relieved Gibraltar in 1782. After continuous service on the Mediterranean and home stations for the next eight years, he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant on 20 Oct. 1790. During the next five years he was mainly employed in the West Indies. Early in 1795 he came home in the Boyne of 98 guns, bearing the flag of Sir John Jervis, and was in her when she was burnt at Spithead on 1 May. On 18 June he was promoted to the command of the Ferret sloop in the North Sea, from which he was appointed to the Echo, supposed to be at the Cape of Good Hope, but found, on his arrival, to have been condemned and broken up. He returned to England in command of one of the Dutch prizes taken in Saldanha Bay, and was advanced to post rank 22 Dec. 1796. In August 1797 he was appointed to the Amphitrite frigate, and in her was actively employed in the West Indies till March 1801, when, after a severe attack of yellow fever, he was sent home with despatches. From 1804 to 1806 he commanded the Beaulieu frigate; and from 1806 to 1811 the Defence of 74 guns, in which he took part in the expedition against Copenhagen
