Disclaimer
&
Bowles DNA Project
 
The Bowles of Canada and their Roots in Ireland and Great Britain

Home  My Story  My Bowles Family  Bowles in Canada  Bowles in Ireland  Bowles in Great Britain  Bowles in the US

Origin of the Name  People's Lives  Related Links  New Additions

The de Busli/de Busci Confusion

Back to Ernold de Builli of Kimberworth or The de Busli Family Tree
 
 
There have been many very useful histories of the de Busli family written.  One of the most helpful is an 85 page article published by W. Bruce Bannerman in 1908 in his 'Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica'.  This article is frequently referred to in other de Busli histories as an authoritive source.  However there are serious errors in Bannerman's paper which have been repeated in some of those other histories which has resulted in muddled histories going online even today.  The most severe error is his statement that a William de Busli was Roger de Busli's brother Ernold de Builli's eldest son and heir.
 
Bannerman stated that Ernold's son William de Busli was married with underage sons when his father (Ernold) d. ca. 1097 and when Roger d. in 1099.  He also stated that this William inherited the 7 ½ knight’s fees in Yorkshire and Nottingham held by his father but we know that Jordan de Builli held those fees, that William had three sons etc. but these details were all in reference to the real William de Busci.
 
In fact his William de Busli did not exist.  Bannerman assumed that the references to several holdings in Bedfordshire which were held by a John de Builli of Kimberworth (Busli/Builli/Bully/Buisly/Bulli etc.) but which had previously been held by a William de Busci (Bussy, Bussel etc.) was best explained by John having inherited the land from his father and therefore de Busci was actually just one of those spelling variations of the de Busli family.
 
However, what actually happened was Ernold de Builli's great-grandson, John de Builly, married Cecily, the eldest daughter and co-heir of William de Busci of Wardon, Bedfordshire by 1182.  That explains how John de Builly inherited William de Busci's land without their being related.
 
This confusion was made by others prior to Bannerman's history.  It seems that Hearne also freely connected William de Bussa to Roger de Busli in his translation of the Latin text of the Lindsay Survey published in 1774.  Bannerman quotes Hearne on p. 77 of volume 1 of his genealogies:
 
 The actual original Latin text has no reference to Roger de Busli:
 
 
However others were aware of the mistake.  In Final Concords for Lancashire, Part 1 the Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, commenting on the Hoghton pedigree in the 1888 edition of The History of Lancashire, states “The pedigree commences with the old blunder of confusing the name of Busli with that of Bussel.”  
 

This site was last updated 05/13/19