You will have seen that I'm unsure about the conclusions that other researchers have come to in relation to the medieval origins of the "Parkers of Browsholme" ancestry, as well as the supposed links from my verified family tree to theirs.  

 

Why is this the case when the internet contains numerous Family Trees submitted by different researchers which seem to underpin and verify each other? The simple answer is that there seem to be too many inconsistencies to be able to accept this research blindly - if this means that I am wrongly dismissing valid research I'll be happy to be proved wrong! 

​

​

The link between my verified Family Tree and the Parker of Browsholme line 

As described elsewhere, my verified Family Tree starts with John Parker who lived in Leyland and died in 1725. John's birth details aren't certain, although I believe that it is most likely that he was born in Leyland in 1655, the son of Edward Parker. So - any link needs to be to John.

 

The Parkers of Browsholme family tree as published is well-documented from the 14th Century to modern times, but naturally focuses on the main lines of descent. Consequently it is not surprising that it isn't possible to identify any link to my Family Tree from theirs - this in itself does not invalidate the possibility of a link, however, as there must be many more "Browsholme Parker" descendants resulting from the minor lines of descent rather than the main ones. 

​

The supposed link from the "Browsholme" Family Tree is Bryan Parker (als Clark) the illegitimate son of Roger Parker, born in Bowland circa 1565. Bryan (a real person!) lived in Waddington and was buried there in 1633. The Waddington Parish Registers record a number of christenings of Bryan's children from 1599 onwards (although none are named Edward).

 

The supposed link into my Family Tree is via an Edward Parker (b 1601) and his son Edward (b1632) both baptised and buried in Leyland. One fairly obvious question is why would the elder Edward be baptised in Leyand when his father was living in Waddington? 

 

I have not been able to find any evidence of either of these 2 Edwards, and my suspicion is that these individuals may have been invented!   Notwithstanding this, I'm continuing to try to find some record of them!

 

​

The source of the Parker of Browsholme line 

Taken from the Parkers of Browsholme website:

In 1381, John of Gaunt granted to Edmund de Alkincotes the employ of ‘le Parker’ of Radholme Laund within the deerpark of the Forest of Bowland. The origin of the family tree can be traced back to his grandfather Peter de Alkincotes. Some genealogists go further back to suggest a connection to the descendants of Edward I; but the creation of ‘le Parker’ in the late 14th C is sound foundation for this Parker family tree.

 

It seems surprising that the family should not want to pursue/state their lineage any further than this, but the Family Pedigree link to Edward I referenced on the Browsholme website (and seemingly taken from "The History of Whalley") is via marriage and does not affect the Alkincoats ancestry, so it is not relevant to this consideration. It may just be that it is the difficulty in being able to be certain about genealogy in medieval times is the reason!

 

So: the "Browsholme" family  state their descendancy to be from the "de Alkincotes" line.  It needs to be remembered that, at this time, surnames as we know them, did not exist.... typically they were either Patronymic (ie based on the name of a father or ancestor), Locative (ie based on a location), or Occupational (self-explanatory!). The Parker surname is clearly Occupational and is first seen in the Browsholme line with Richard le Parker (1300 - 1346) who was the son of Adam de Alcancoates (a Locative surname) - interestingly Adam had another son who was named William de Alcancotes.....  so the potential difficulties in tracing (and proving!) lineages are immediately clear.

 

Alkincotes (the place name) is of Celtic origin and is believed to be of Saxon or earlier origin. It is not explicitly mentioned in Domesday Book as it is part of the Manor of Whalley - it is first mentioned in published records as Altenecotes in the Lancashire Pipe Rolls of 1201, in which William de Altenecote is referenced. The first "de Alcancote" I have found "online pedigrees" is Richard de Alcancotes (1190 - 1250) who may be the grandfather of the above-mentioned "Browsholme" ancestor Peter de Alkincotes. As mentioned above the Alkincotes surname is Locative, so whoever the first de Alkincote was would have had a different name prior to moving to Alkincotes, As an added complication, as if one were needed,  there was more than one estate in Alkincotes at this time: in addition to a number of freehold estates in 1311 there were four other estates there held by charter, viz. 32 acres held by Richard son of Adam de Alkincotes; 7 acres by William son of Adam de Alkincotes; 23 acres by Adam son of Peter de Alkincotes; and 20 acres by Richard son of Adam Ayre. The first of these was in 1342 held by John the Parker in virtue of a grant by Henry de Lacy to Adam son of Richard de Alkincotes; the second was a grant by Adam de Alkincotes to his son William; the third was held by James de Walton in 1323; and the fourth appears to be the tenement known as Heir's House.

 

This resume is meant to convey the difficulty in determining who is who, and where have they come from when researching family history from this period - it is no wonder that the Parkers of Browsholme are happy to regard Peter de Alkincotes as their first-known ancestor.

 

​

In the beginning!

With the foregoing "health warning" about medieval lineage in mind we now need to look at the online researchers' work in building the lineage before the de Alkincotes time. For the purposes of this analysis I'm regarding the "beginning" as being the time around the Norman Conquest, as this is where the majority of online researchers have arrived/started!  All of these (that I have found) have placed the le Brus family as the start of the story.:

 

The first thing to say is that there is apparent unanimity among researchers that Richard de Alkincotes is descended from the "le Brus"/"le Parquier" line with many having identified  Johannes le Parquier as his father, even though Johannes died some years before Richard was born - apart from this inconsistency the question of familial links still exists. 

​

There is no doubt that the le Brus family are "real" and that members of that family accompanied William of Normandy in his Conquest and subsequently held lands in the North of England - so, a good start! The various internet Family Trees do, however, have discrepancies of detail regarding dates, familial relationships, historical data and the interpretation of all of this into a "family story" - there is next to no annotation that I have seen that explains or validates the information provided. Set against this is the historical tome "Family Records of the Bruces and Cumyns" written by M.E. Cumming Bruce and published in 1870 and verified as being from "Authentic Public and Private Documents"..... it seems to me that one might take this volume as the definitive word on the Bruce (le Brus) family.  Having made this point, I will say that, whilst it is evident that the "internet storyline" is quite wrong in places, the general outline of the le Brus family pre and post 1066 is still valid even though the precise detail isn't.

 

Note: 

I am purposely simplifying the following storyline as much of the detail is irrelevant to the Parker lineage - hopefully I've distilled the key information.

   

The le Brus family has its roots in Scandinavia, with an early family antecedent (Rollo) leading the invasion of Viking Normandy in 912 thus becoming the Count of Rouen. "Our" story starts with Rognvald Brucesson who was Earl of Orkney in the early 11th century - the details of his life aren't important here, but whilst he was "busy" in Russia his 2 sons Regenvald and Robert moved to live in Normandy with cousins (descendants of the above-mentioned Rollo). Robert is the key individual and until his death in 1035 served as Privy Councillor to Robert the Magnifique, Duke of Normandy and father of William the Conqueror - he held this position until the Duke's death in 1035.  At some point Robert was installed as the first Lord of Brusse, being the site of a practically impregnable fortress, strategically situated in the middle of the Cotentin Peninsula at Brusse (Brix is the modern name!). It is unclear as to whether Robert accompanied William the Conqueror in 1066 (Robert died in 1066) but his son Adam certainly did. Adam and his son Robert were subsequently involved in the subjugation of the North in 1068 and were rewarded with widespread landholdings. In the Domesday Book (1086) Robert le Brus is recorded as holding 94 Lordships in Yorkshire but NOT in any of the area comprising Bowland/Alkincoats - Adam became Lord of Cleveland and Robert became Lord of Annandale. Their direct descendants are well-documented in the above-mentioned "Bruce Family Records" and do not include any connection to the de Alkincotes - in fact this was a very prominent family, with one of Robert's descendants being Robert the Bruce (King of Scotland).

 

With an eminent family lineage such as this I think that it is highly unlikely that Robert le Brus's (great)grandson could be Richard de Alkincotes who was not of the same eminence as the le Brus family (added to the fact that there is no evidence that the  le Brus family has no recorded lineage or geographical connection to the de Alkincotes).

 

As a matter of interest, the "internet genealogies" mostly start with Rognvald Brusse with a popular assertion that his second wife was the sister of William the Conqueror, this fact being the reason given for his son Robert's "escape" to Normandy when Rognvald was killed in 1046. These genealogies mix and confuse various Roberts and Adams (that is if you accept the validity of the "Bruce Family Records") but generally one can trace the "true" le Brus storyline in them......  albeit they all make the leap from le Brus to le Parquier to de Alkincotes with no apparent evidence.

​

​

So - where does this leave us?

Not a lot wiser, I think!

​

Before I submitted my DNA I had come to the conclusion that the supposed links between my Parker lineage and the Browsholme lineage were so tenuous that it wasn't worth the effort to investigate the possible family roots - particularly given that the genealogy seemingly came from Upper Normandy and beyond that to Orkney. With the result of my DNA analysis identifying definite genealogical links to Upper Normandy and Orkney it seemed that there might be something to investigate after all!

 

I don't think that my additional researches summarised on this page have produced any additional clarity:

• The link between my line and the Browsholme line is still missing

• The Browsholme line cannot be validated further back than the de Alcancotes family

• It seems improbable that the Alcancotes ancestors can be the le Brus family - although equally there is no definitive proof that they are not!  Additionally it seems unlikely that the records exist to identify who the Alcancotes ancestors actually are.

​

Whatever my ancestry might be, it is clear that my DNA indicates that I have genealogical links to Upper Normandy so that means that I must have an ancestor from there. I don't think that this narrows the field too much, however, as it seems clear that the vast majority of what might be described as "leading citizens" in Medieval times would have a Norman lineage, Additionally the Norman Knights and Nobility who accompanied the Conqueror must have been accompanied by foot soldiers, servants, etc so my Norman link is not necessarily to a "leading citizen" - nothing should be discounted!

 

A graphic representation of the "Supposed Ancestral Line" may be viewed by following this link>>>  

​

​

A final word

I think that it is unlikely that the question of proving an ancestral line back to Norman times is going to be resolved and it may well be that the "le Brus" family are, indeed, the beginning of the lineage in this country. However, should it be the case that the "internet genealogies" prove to be accurate it would provide a very unexpected coming together of the wider Family Tree:

 

In such a supposed Parker Ancestry, the maternal grandfather of Robert le Brus' wife was Odo of Chartres, the Count of Blois who lived 950 - 996.

 

In Christine's supposed Strettell Ancestry (click to view) the source individual is Gilbert de Venables who was from Normandy and accompanied the Conqueror in 1066. Gilbert de Venables great-grandfather was the same Odo of Chartres, the Count of Blois.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

It would be good end to the joint Family Tree if that was the case!

​