Wednesday, November 14, 2012

More Questions about Pierre de Morlaix

In James Fulton Perkins' essay on the Perkins family, he writes about the origins of the Perkins name in England.  This essay is widely  copied and quoted. In a previous post I gave my reasons why I do not believe that Pierre de Morlaix  existed.  This is a continuation of that post.  When I first read the essay I was mystified by some of his statements, his lack of proof, documentation, or even logical conclusions. But what is more mind boggling is that other readers just accept it without question and add it to their family history. I know this is a fairly long post, but I hope you'll read through it and come to the same conclusions as me. 

Since his essay seems to be the basis of so much of what you read about the Perkins family genealogy I think that it warrants a closer look. So lets pick this apart and see what comes of it. 

Perkins is one of the most notable surnames from the European genealogical research of Anglo/Saxon surnames, and its historical trail has emerged from the mists of time as an influential surname of the middle ages. 
What does he mean by the European genealogical research of Anglo/Saxon surnames? Is he speaking in general terms or to a specific study of names.  What does he mean by "influential" surname?  Who were those influential Perkins?

This essay is intended to document the facts ...The writer's purpose was to clear up some of the errors, omissions, folklore and stories, which were uncovered during a search for family history.
Excellent what we need are facts.
It should be noted at the beginning that the original spelling of the name was not Perkins.  Confusing to most, the name was originally deMorlaix as the manuscripts of this time period were, most always, written in Latin or French.  The later translators Anglicized the name from deMorlaix to Morley.      
In this bit the author is saying that the name Perkins was originally deMorlaix. Is he saying that deMorlaix = Perkins, or de Morlaix = Morley.  The later translators, (who were they) changed the name to Morley.  The only time the name of this ancestor appears in writing is in the visitation of Berkshire in 1623 and it is written in latin. His name is written Petrus Morley alias Perkins. So why would his first name be in Latin but his surname is not.  More importantly, how do you know his name was de Morlaix? I thought "de Morlaix" meant he was from Morlaix, France, as in Peter of Morlaix.

Research of ancient manuscripts, which include the Doomsday Book by Duke William of Normandy in 1086 A.D., the Ragman Rolls of 1291-1296 authorized by King Edward 1st of England, the Curia Regis Rolls, The Pipe Rolls and The Hearth Rolls of England, found the first record of the name Perkins in Leicestershire, England
Okay, so here he says that the name Perkins was first found in Leicestershire.  Peter de Morley was from Shropshire and then Oxfordshire, he never lived in Leicestershire, that I know of.
 The name Perkins, in one form or another (i.e.: deMorlaix/Morley), first appears on the census rolls taken by the Kings of England beginning about 400 A.D.  
The very first census was taken in 1086 by King William.  What is he referring to when he states that the name was first found in 400 AD?  Again he seems to be saying that de Morlaix and Perkins are the same thing.  In the prior statement he said the first time the name is found is in records relating to Leicestershire, is this a different Perkins family.  Your right James, I am confused.  If any one knows which of these ancient documents contains the name Perkins please pass it on.

The family name Perkins is one of the most distinguished of the ancient world during a time of Kingdoms, Kings and Knights
Examples please, who were these distinguished men and what did they do? Sir Perkins, King Perkins, the Kingdom of Perkins...what is he talking about?

If we are to believe Bede, the Chronicler of the Saxons, this founding race of England was led by the Saxon General/Commanders Hengist and Horsa and settled in Kent during this time and was a Anglo/Saxon race.  
Gobbly gook.  This does not make any sense.

However, there is evidence to support the claim that the name is of Celtic/Welsh origin.  
Bring it on.

Based on British history we know that after the last Roman Legions left the continent in the early part of the 5th century the Saxons, Angles and other Low  German tribes settled in Southeastern England around Kent. 
One glaring error, the Romans left the Island of England in about 410 AD.  They did not leave the continent (of Europe).  Angles, Saxon and Jutes came in waves and settle most of southeastern England.

 However, the Ancient Britons (Celtics) were the true natives of the area and it is an amalgamation of the Angles, Saxons and Celtic Britons who became what we refer to today as the Anglo/Saxons.  The truth is that the Angles and Saxons may have "moved in", but the Britons were there in far greater numbers, thus accounting for the claim that the blood line is far more Celtic than any other. 
 Therefore it should be concluded that the origins of the Perkins "Clan" are Celtic/Welsh.

Okay, the Celtic Britons were there first.  They probably did outnumber the Anglo Saxons, but what does this have to do with the Perkins name.  How can you possibly say that the Perkins clan is Welsh.  I conclude that you (James) have no idea what your talking about.  And, I thought you said that Peter was from France. So what is all this about Celtic Briton?

 By the 13th century the family name Perkins emerged as a notable English family in the county of Leicester, where they were recorded as a family of great antiquity seated as Lords of the manor and estates in that shire. 
So far the author has told us that the Perkins name was originally de Morlaix, now he tells us that the name was found in Leicester in the century before Peter's birth, and by the 1200's were already a family of great antiquity. So were there Perkins in Leicester for hundreds of years before Peter?  Who were these Lords of the manor, names please and what do they have to do with our Peter who came from France.

They had branched to Ufton Court in Berkshire and Sutton Coldfield inWarwickshire, later branching to Nuneaton, Marston and Hillmorton, Warwickshire.  The main stem of the family continued at Orton Hall in Leicestershire, where it remains to this day.  

You're right, the Perkins name can/could be found in all those places but Orton Hall is now a Best Western Hotel, if the "main stem" of the family lives there it must be pretty crowded

Notable amongst the family at this time was Perkins of Leicester.  For the next two or three centuries bearers of the surname Perkins flourished and played a significant role in the political development of England.
Enough with these notable significant people, who in heck are they! What part did they play in the political development? 

It is at this point where we pick up the story of the present day Perkins.  The last generation to use the original spelling of Morlaix in or around 1331 was the family of one Pierre de Morlaix of Shropshire, England.  
The last generation? The only person who used the name was Pierre.  Unless there were lots of de Morlaix's running around Morlaix in France.

He appears to have been born 1312 in Bretagne, Morliax, Normandy, France and died about 1384 in Shropshire, England.  
I think this should read, based on a wild guess he was born in 1312 and what his date of death is based on, since, remember now, the only time his name is ever written was in the Visitation manuscript, there is no way to know when he died.  The manuscript only says that he was alive in 1381. 

His name indicates that although originally from Morlaix, Normandy, France he was part of the Celtic/Welsh group previously mentioned who migrated to England.  
What part of this makes sense to anyone?  Why does the fact that he was from Morlaix in France and named for the town of Morlaix lead you to believe that he was Celtic/Welsh.  Am I the only one who doesn't get this?

During this time period surnames were not in common use.  Everybody was known by some personal characteristic such as what they did, who there father was or where they came from, hence Pierre de Morlaix was from Morlaix, France.  
Exactly, he was called de Morlaix because he was from Morlaix, France.  

Attaining a high position within English society, Pierre became the High Steward of the Hugo de Spencer Estate of Oxfordshire, England (later known as the House of Spencer, of whom Princes Diana was a daughter).
Now this is a bit of wishful thinking.  James says that Pierre was born in 1312. Hugh Despenser Sr. and Hugh Despenser the Younger were both executed for treason with a few weeks of each other in the year 1326.  Pierre would only be about 14 years old, so it is implausible that he would work for either of them.  Immediately after their deaths their lands and possessions were confiscated by the King. Hugh the Younger had a son, Hugh III, born in 1308. Hugh III was imprisoned after his fathers death.  He did not receive his freedom and his pardon until Feb. 1332, at which time he made a pilgrimage to Santiago in Spain. In 1332 Pierre would have been 20 years old.  The King eventually Knighted him and gave him land. Hugh continued to try to rehabilitate the name Despenser and eventually won favor with King Edward III, but he never came close to achieving all that his Father and Grandfather had.  Hugh died in Feb. 1349, possibly of the Black Death.  In 1349 Pierre would have been 37.  If he worked for Hugh Despenser it would have to have been between the ages of 20 and 37. He was most likely the Steward or Bailiff of the Manor at Shipton.  He was not a "high Steward" of all the Despenser lands.  
Hugh had no living children so his property was inherited by his nephew Edward, son of his brother Edward. Edward was killed in battle in, are you ready for this, Morlaix, France! Now where have I heard that name before.
Pierre changed his name to the English translated version "Peter Morley" when Charles V, the Black Prince of France renewed the Hundred Years War with England.  This war was disrupting English shipping, compromising trade with Spain and the Netherlands and persecuting English subjects on the mainland in many ways.  
So, I covered this part in my previous post, but it's too good to pass up.  Charles V, the King of France, did renew the Hundred Years War in 1369.  He fought against English forces led by Edward, The Black Prince, son of Edward III.   

Because of the French victory at the Battle of Hastings, Frenchmen became persona-non-grata in England so to conceal his French origins Pierre changed his name to the English translation, Peter Morley. (1312-1384)
What!!!! The Battle of Hastings was in 1066, 300 years in the past.  Why would he have to conceal his origins? This is nonsense. Did he speak with a funny voice to disguise his French accent?

Unwilling to end the heritage of the deMorlaix name, when Peter (Pierre de Morlaix) Morley married Agnes Taylor, daughter of John Taylor of Madresield, Worcestershire, England, they had a son.  
Okay, he didn't want the de Morlaix name to end, so he and Agnes had a son. Like they were able to plan that or something.  I don't want my heritage to end, so I'm having a son!

He was to be named Henry Pierrekin (meaning "first son of Pierre", born 1340 in Shropshire, England and died in Hillmorton, Warwickshire, England). 
He was to be or he was. Actually, all we know is that his name was Henry Perkins, thats it, nothing else, nada. We don't know when he was born, where he was born or when  he died. (but it probably wasn't Hillmorton).
The "kin" suffix indicates the eldest son in a family and any subsequent sons are simply called with the suffix "son", as in "Pierreson".  Hence, the first son is Pierrekin and the second son of Peter (Pierre) Morley would be "Pierreson".   
As above, Henry was Henry Perkins! And "kin" is a diminutive. It it means "little Peter".

 Henry Pierrekin altered the name further, again to disguise the French origin, becoming the very English Henry Pierkyn. 
Nope, all we know is that he was Henry Perkins.  This is his entry in the genealogy:
 Henricus Perkins filius Petri = [blank] and had
When Henry married his eldest son was to be called John Perkyns (born 1360 in Madresfield, Worcestershire, England and died 05 Jan 1400 in the same place); again the suffix to indicate the eldest but changed from "kin" to "kyns".  John became quite well educated and began often signing his name as John Perkins.  Now as the prosperous John Perkins, Esquire he attained the position of Lord of the manor of Madrasfield as well as High Steward of the deSpencers at the passing of his father Henry.  Thus began the spelling carried by all subsequent generations.      
Not true the name continued to have various spellings, including the Parkyns of Upton in 1623. And John was not Perkins but Parkyns.  There is just a few more lines to the essay, but it's just more of the same stuff.

Sources on Hugh Despenser III
Susan Higginbotham, The Other Hugh Le Despenser

I welcome any comments you might have good or bad, I only ask that if you want to argue a point you provide a source.


Martha Raysik said...

Hi Jeanie,

I too have been on the Perkins- Morlaix trail, and while there are serious questions about the disputed book of James Fulton, and glaring issues, of which you do point out well, I still cannot doubt entirely the conclusion of that he reached, and that is Peter Perkins was in fact Pierre of Morlaix. (my own family lore, told me this line went back to the French and English Royal lines)

I do not want to sound the way this sounds lol:). But I believe it is a rush to judgement to unequivocally state there was "no such person" just based on "lack" of proof in the 1300's of that is hard to come by no matter what I am sure you would agree.

In your blog you state.

"I thought "de Morlaix" meant he was from Morlaix, France, as in Peter of Morlaix."

And so, it seems a reasonable assumption that a "heraldic visitor" questioning a person, the servant in the deSpencer House, in 1623, about his ancestors of 1381, that using logic,
If you are the 1623 census taker, writing down the names in Latin, and the man before you speaks English (as this was the exact situation in England by 1623, I beleive) and yet the record he relies on (in his bible or household accounts) the names from 1381 are written in French, can you see how logical and simple it was for the name Morlaix to be written down as Morley?

So, the 1623 Perkins man, read the French entry in his account/bible whatever, and read it English to the Heraldic Visitor, as"
Peter of Morlaix, alias Perkins, and it got written in the Latin book as of course:

Petrus Morley alias Perkins = Alice Taylor
de co. Salopiae Servius ( sic) Uxor Eius
dni Hugonia de Spenser
dni de Shipton in Com:
Supstes 4 R 2

Anyway, I love your blog, its very well written, and as I am new to the Morlaix trail, I am trying to find photos of that actual 1623 Latin entry, and am looking more at the Coat of Arms that was indeed the Perkins line.

Also, the name Peter Maulay of the man whom is said to have guarded Eleanor of Brittany, certainly points to the same name, as it is phonetically exact, yet I still have not seen the orginal transcripts of the history in question, and as we have three languages, they certainly could not have made this more complicated for us.

Martha Raysik

Anonymous said...

Aa another Perkins descendant of John Perkins and Judith Gater and their descendants to Peter Morley, I found your blog very intersting. I receommend you read the well-researched 1998 book by Paula Perkins Mortensen entitled "English Origin of Six Early Colonists by the Name of Perkins?" Part I, page 1 "First Generation" deals with Piere de Morlaix or Peter Morley and has citations to references from The Calendar of Chancery, Warrents 1244-1326, Vol. 1. These are too long to included here but you will find them interesting. y

Unknown said...

Hey all, i love your work great condos im looking up my family line, Perkins My name is Joel Cushing, I live in Maine, I was born Joseph Antonio Delano Perkins, so far I've gotten from me to Pierre De Morlaix/ Peter Morley ill just give first names its literally Perkins all the way through on the males side, Myself, Floyd my father Floyd R his father, Henry R, David Jacob Matthew III, Matthew Jr. Captain Mathew Sargent Jacob, John Perkins I of Ipswich, Henry, Thomas, Henry, Thomas Henry, William Sr, Thomas Perkins Esq, Lord William of Ufto, Bailiff to the Duke of Gloucester, MP for Berkshire, John Perkins, (Parkyns) lord Of Madresfield, Married to Margaret Ufton Daughter of William Ufton Lord Of Ufton, Margaret and Pierre married but what do you think happens when back in the days of honor knights and kings and you leave your wife who's father is a lord? He ran from what? Not sure.
Perkins, Gater, Bradbury, Woodbury, Bozeman, Wells and Bennett, Junction, Salem witch trials, I believe Mary was the only survivor after being sentenced to death by escape.

Anonymous said...

Hello cousin,
As you would probably know as being in the Perkins clan, we are related to millions around the world. My father mentioned about Peter Morliax (Peter Morley) when I was very young and because my Father truly believed it did too. I started to become suspicious in my later years when I found out about the Perkins name written in William the Conqueror doomsday book of 1086. Way before Peter Morlaix birth around 1310 to 1330?
My question is: why is it stated in depth in the Family tree website, Latter Day Saints have Pierre de Morlaix and his ancestors in the Perkins family tree is puzzleind

Roles of Men, Women and Children in 17th Century Puritan Massachusetts

In 17 th century pur itan Massachusetts , the roles of men , women and children were very clearly defined . Men were the ...