In recent conversations with Anthony Pierpont (my 4th cousin), he indicated that he had a copy of a document which showed the Pierpont family lineage going back to 1000 BC. Since the Pierpont family currently traces their lineage to Hugh de Pierrepont in Normandy around 980 AD, if true, this would triple the ancestral line of the family. Of course, I was interested! Later that day he located the document and sent me a copy of it.
This document is 27 pages long and was written by
Howard Spencer Neal (1878-1947) (Howard was my 2nd cousin, twice
removed and a 1st cousin, twice removed of Anthony. It was written
by Howard in 1932 (when he was in his mid-50s) and appears to be based on a lot
of historical documents which he lists on the first page. Howard served as an
assistant historian of the PFA from 1935 until his death in 1947. True to the
responsibilities of the PFA historian of the time (see responsibilities),
the document is in several sections, each separately numbered (they were typed).
I have saved the document separately here. The page
numbers are relative to the entire document, not the individual sections: 663 - Howard
Neal History.pdf
· Forward,
page 1, lists his various sources
· Danish
Kings, pages 2-4 – see comments below
· Pierpont
family beginnings, page 5-7 – a summary of the family line from the beginnings
in Normandy, to England, then to America (this material is drawn from Moffat’s
book “Pierrepont Genealogies from Norman times to 1913”, but here only the
material relative to the branch which went to America is included. However,
there are a couple of interesting notes which I will investigate later.
· First
several generations of Rev. James Pierpont, pages 8-11 – also from Moffat
· Separate
charts for each of the children of Ezra and Mary [Blakeslee] Pierpont, pages
11-27 – from the records of the PFA which in 1932 was only focused on the
Waterbury branch of the Pierponts. Since this document was prepared in 1932,
the generations born toward the end of that period are somewhat sparse and
there may be some errors. (For example, my mother and her siblings (they were
born between 1920 and 1929) are listed
on page 26 but the order is incorrect – should be Clarence, Alice, Sylvia,
Richard, Violet.)
Since the sections beginning with page 5 are
essentially copies of the official PFA genealogy (as of 1932), I’ll not comment
any further on it here. Rather, I want to concentrate my focus on the material
from pages 2-4 which is the basis for extending the family line back another
2000 years.
Genealogical Tables of the Sovereigns of
the World
I was able to locate the source of the genealogical
table behind pages 2-4 of Neal’s research. It was in a book written by The Rev.
William Betham in 1795 to the King of England. The book consists entirely of
genealogical tables from various sources. For example, Chart I is from the
Bible and lists the descendants of Adam down through the sons of Noah. (If you
are interested, you can see the entire book here - 663 -
Ancient Ancestors.pdf). But for purposes of this research, I’ve extracted
three pertinent pages which contain charts CCCLXXIV through CCCLXXV and which
document the Heathen Kings of Denmark and the Christian Kings of Denmark. You
can refer to these pages here: 663 -
Ancient Ancestors extract.pdf. You
will notice that the first chart begins with Humble of Zealand and toward the
top of the last page you can see Gunilda who marries Earl Paling.
However, this chart stops just short of the material
in Neal’s research! In order to make the connection complete, we need to
confirm the following facts:
1. Gunilda
and Earl Paling have to have children, the most well-known would be Gunnora (2nd
wife of Richard, 1st Duke of Normandy), and a younger sister Duvalina;
2. Duvelina
needs to marry Hugh, Bishop of Constance and Lord of Pierrepont in Picardy; and
3. Duvelina
and Hugh need to have 3 sons, including Ralph (ancestor of the Warrene family),
Roger (ancestor of the Mortimers), and Godfrey (ancestor of the Pierreponts).
Other Sources:
Starting with Gunnor[a]:
There is a fairly scholarly article in Wikipedia on
Gunnor/Gunnora (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunnor#cite_note-11).
It tells how she met Richard I of Normandy and acknowledges her later marriage
to him.
Regarding point (1) above, it says that “The names of
Gunnor’s parents are unknown”, but then acknowledges that one researcher
believed that she was of noble Danish ancestry. Thus, it is possible that this
is true.
Regarding points (2) and (3) above, there is reference
to an extensive research article on “The Sisters and Nieces of Gunnor, Dutchess
of Normandy” in The Genealogist magazine from 1920-1921 by G. H. White. You can
read that article here (pages 57-65 and 128-132): https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Genealogist/MyM9AQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1.
While there does seem to be acknowledgement that some sister/niece
of Gunnor married into the Warrene family, the name of that individual, their
exact relationship to Gunnor, and whom within the Warrene family they married
are subject to much speculation. There is no mention made of any connection to
the Pierrepont family.
Starting with Hugh:
Starting our search with Hugh de Pierrepont instead of
Gunnor[a], we find additional source material in WikiTree (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Pierrepont-45).
There is some discussion about the stone bridge that is the basis for the name
Pierrepont. I’ve already researched that extensively and posted my research in
a prior blog entry: https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2022/01/origin-of-pierrepont-family.html.
So I’ll not repeat that research here.
But there is another interesting reference in this
WikiTree article that pertains to our current situation. In the Sussex
Archaeological Collections, Vol 11, Page 84, this WikiTree article says “Hugh,
Bishop of Coutances … marries Niece of Gunnors, wife of Richard I, Duke of
Normandy” and further names his grandsons as Robert de Pierpoint (1059-1086)
and Godfrey de Pierpoint (1059-1086). Let’s look at that reference https://www.google.com/books/edition/Sussex_Archaeological_Collections_Relati/uUMJAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA84&printsec=frontcover.
Although the reference is to a chart on page 84, one
really needs to take this in the context of the supporting research about Hurst
Pierpont (one of the largest estates in Sussex) which begins on page 50. This
survey starts with the Domesday survey, i.e. the documentation of the Norman
families in England after their success at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. The
original text, which was quite extensive, was in Latin, but this book in the
Sussex Archaeological Collection is in English. It has pretty detailed
information about the owners of Hurst Pierpont and it’s owners over many
generations and the family’s eventual moving to Nottingham and Holme-Pierpont
which they inherited through a marriage with Annora Manvers.
I’m not going into all the details of this research,
but let’s look at how it related to the three questions we started with:
· Points
(1) and (2), while there is no mention of the parents of Gunnor here, it does
seem to pretty clearly reference an unnamed woman who is a niece of Gunnor and
who marries Hugh. It also gives a lot of credence to Hugh, Bishop of Coutances
being the same person as Hugh de Pierrepont who lived in Picardy.
· Regarding
point (3), there is a very strong case made for Hugh and his unnamed wife being
the parents of not just Godfrey de Pierrepont, but of Roger de Mortimer and
Ralph de Warrene as well. Each of these three brothers became the progenitor of
a branch of their family.
Starting with Huge de Coutances:
There is a great deal of information in geni.com
(see https://www.geni.com/people/Hugh-de-Coutances-Bishop-of-Coutances/6000000015019969348)
which goes into a lot of detail about Hugh and his purported sons, Roger de
Mortimer, Ralph de Warrene, and Godfrey. This detail is a mixture of Latin,
French, and English and shows some of the difficulties in reconciling various
sources with regard to these relationships. This kind of scholarly research is
interesting to try and decipher and is not for the faint-hearted.
Other Related Research:
There is information in a family tree on familysearch.org
(see https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/GVDV-9DB)
which has a family line beginning with Hugues de Wasnad Sr (905) -> Hugues
de Wasnad Jr (930) -> Hugh de Pierrepont I (956), married Clemence (958)
-> Sir Hugh de Pierrepont II (980), married Liutgarde de Trepel (980) -> Hugh
de Pierrepoint (995) and Geoffroi de Pierrepont de Trepel III (1025). But with
five consecutive Hughs and no source information for any of them, I have no
reason to believe that some individual by the name of Hugues de Wasnad is in
our family tree, nor to believe that someone named Clemence or Liutgarde de
Trepel belongs in our family tree. However, interestingly, there is a very
short article in Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugues_de_Pierrepont)
which makes reference to Hugues de Wasnad being the father of a Hugh de
Pierrepont who lived in France in the early 1200s. Perhaps this is the source
of confusion for the relationships which are attributed to have happened some
200+ years previous. It appears that the source of this information is found on
page 200 in the Chronique de Hainaut (see https://www.google.com/books/edition/Chronique_de_Hainaut/v6U7AQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22hugues+de+wasnad%22&pg=PA200&printsec=frontcover)
although here it is in French instead of English.
Conclusion
Not all scholars agree and there is a certain amount
of speculation around what the relationships between individuals are when two
names appear in the same transaction, or related to the same event. So, while
not being able to be absolutely certain, there is considerable support for the
relationships that we started with, namely that:
1. Gunnor[a]
was a member of the Danish royal family and she married Richard, 1st
Duke of Normandy;
2. An
unnamed female, who was most likely the niece of Gunnor[a], married Hugh,
Bishop of Constance and Lord of Pierrepont in Picardy; and
3. Hugh
and his wife had 3 sons, including Ralph (ancestor of the Warrene family),
Roger (ancestor of the Mortimers), and Godfrey (ancestor of the Pierreponts).
Based on this preponderance of the evidence, my
tendency as a genealogical researcher is to accept the purported connection of
the line of Danish kings through a female who married Hugh. While Hugh may have
been the first to carry the de Pierrepont name because he lived in a castle
near a stone bridge in Normandy, the bloodlines he passed along to his children
and later descendants included the Danish roots of his wife.
Thus, we in the collective de
Pierrepont/Pierrepont/Pierpont/Pierpoint family can be relatively confident
that our genealogy is traceable not just back to 980 in Normandy, but back
another 2000 years to Humble of Zealand in 1038 BC!
