Boklerplaiers

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
paul bulkley

Boklerplaiers

Legg inn av paul bulkley » 05 jun 2006 18:11:01

Dear Matt:

Thank you for your defense of the Anglo Saxon
Bulkeleys. Hopefully you will discover something that
will deter me from studying Norman Scandinavian
records.

However I think you perhaps misunderstand my thinking.
I have simply ventured to suggest that the Bulkley
Family name was not derived from your Anglo Saxon
village name of Bulloc-leah as claimed by some
authorities.

Naturally I have no objection to your beliefs if you
can support such beliefs with sound evidence. However
without that evidence it does not seem logical for you
to refute my evidence with "IFS", "BUTS", "PERHAPS".

Anyhow none of it is important, but I have to admit
that I find your responses puzzling:

(1) You claim that the Lascy Family and the Revier
Family (The Bulkleys are connected by marriage) were
"lesser Norman French lords"!

My information advises the following:

Lascy Family: The creation of the honor of Pontefract
by Ilbert Lascy took place under the first two Norman
Kings. In 1086 the estates were to be found in the
south half of the West Riding of Yorkshire (area about
500 square miles - that is a fairly large garden). The
estate was increased 1102 with the inclusion of the
Hundred of Blackburnshire in North East Lancashire.

Revier Family: 1086/1094. Richard de Redvers (son)
Richard or Baldwin married Adelize (daughter) William
de Peverel of Nottingham. Richard de Redvers was a
nephew/cousin of Nigel IV St Sauveur of Halton and
wife Emma (daughter) William Fitz Osborn.

"Ricardo de Redvers nepoti praede Willelmi filii
Osbertni, tunc comiti Exoniae" (Monasticon Anglicanum
P.1041)

He was a very close counsellor/adviser of Henry I
1085/1107.

I am doubtful that either family would countenance an
Anglo Saxon son in law unless he possessed remarkable
wealth and possessions.

(2) You stipulate that a single parish register entry
for an ancestor (my 8th great grandfather) with the
name Bucler does not make him a descendant of
bucklemakers - " that would be the only case if most
early records of the family called them Bucler"

Well I have just quickly scanned through the
Lancashire line records - I counted at least forty
(40) documents recording the name of Bucler, Bucle,
Bucley (1280-1580) Would that number be adequate?

(3) You gave some examples of Anglo Saxon words
supporting the name of Bulkley. How about adding this
one to your list:

BUKLER - a small round shield (Old French BOCLER =
BOSS (on a shield) Refer to Dictionary Medieval Times
by Coredon.

(4)Another rather thought provoking item is in
Wainwright's "Scandinavian England". He states that
along the Lune Valley Lancashire there were
Scandinavian settlers named "BULK'.

And if your visit Ireland, the country is full of
Buckleys - and Wainwright claims that Ireland had a
plentiful supply of Scandinavians in the past.

Finally where are the subscribers with fresh ideas?
Every day one reads that another authority of the past
was wrong. As few genealogical records can be
substantiated, it is absurd to place all one's
convictions in these records, and argue against fresh
ideas.

I repeat I suspect that the authorities that claim the
Bulkley Family gained their name from the village of
Bulloc-leah and the village of Buckley are probably
incorrect.

By the way I found this interesting record that
demonstrates that the Bulkley Family despite any
pretensions it may have, have plenty of "bad eggs"

1844 QUARTER SESSIONS BEAUMARIS ANGLESEY:

Summary Conviction of John Griffiths laborer of
Beaumaris. Charged with damaging SIX TURNIPS growing
on the land of Sir Richard William Bulkeley.

Griffiths to pay 5/- plus 8/- costs or be imprisoned
seven days hard labour.

I have no doubt Sir Richard Williams Bulkeley would
have demanded the death penalty if the unfortunate
Griffiths had eaten the miserable turnips. NICE GUY.

Sincerely Yours,


Paul Bulkley



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Matt Tompkins

Re: Boklerplaiers

Legg inn av Matt Tompkins » 05 jun 2006 19:06:47

Hello Paul,

I wasn't suggesting that the Lacies and Redvers were lesser lords -
my points were (i) 12C Norman-French lords did marry Anglo-Saxons
occasionally, and so the fact that a de Bulkeley married a de Lacy in
1193 does not of itself prove that he was of Norman background (though,
as I said, he probably was), and (ii) by 1380 there were no Normans and
Anglo-Saxons, just Englishmen, so a marriage in that year between a
Bulkeley and a Redvers cannot prove anything either way about the
Conquest-period origins of the two families. However, while those two
marriages don't prove anything, it is nevertheless very likely that
the early de Bulkeleys who were lords of Bulkeley in Cheshire were
Norman (as I also said before). It may also be worth repeating that
the fact that the place-name Bulkeley is probably Anglo-Saxon says
nothing at all about the background of anyone called Bulkeley in any
period - plenty of Normans took their surnames from their English
estates.

As for the number of Buclers and Buckleys in Lancashire, my point was
that if someone who was normally called Bulkeley, and whose ancestors
were normally called Bulkeley, is referred to in a single record as
Buckler then it was just a spelling aberration and does not mean his
ancestors made bucklers - his name is still most likely to have derived
from the place called Bulkeley. It is only if he and his ancestors
were normally called Buckler that he is more likely to be descended
from a man who was a buckler-maker. The number of Buclers and Bucleys
in Lancashire is only relevant to the origin of your Bulkley 8th
great-grandfather in Kent if he was descended from them.

That dictionary entry does not say Bukler was an Anglo-Saxon word, but
that it was a Middle English word, and one derived from a French word
at that! Anyway, as I have said before, while it is not impossible
that the modern surname Bulkeley or Bulkley may have derived from that
word, it is more likely that it derives from the place-name Bulkeley.

I don't think the presence of Scandinavians called Bulk in Lancashire
or of Buckleys in Ireland (which had plenty of Norman, English and
Welsh immigration as well as Scandinavian) has much relevance to the
origins of the surname Bulkeley.

You complain that I deal in ifs and buts and perhapses, but
unfortunately there is no other feasible approach to surname origins.
The only way to be settle the matter conclusively would be to trace the
ancestry of all Bulkeleys, Buckleys and Bucklers back to the first to
use those names and find out how they acquired them. Until that can be
done all we can do is talk of probabilities and possibilities - but
those probablilities and possibilities must be based on logic and a
firm understanding of the historical development of surnames and
place-names, of the societies they developed in, and of the records
left by those societies.

Regards,

Matt Tompkins

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»