Is "Pedigrees of some of the Emperor Charlemange's Decendants" reliable?

Question

I have the 3 volumes of the above mentioned book. I know of a few errors in them and wanted to know if they are considered a reliable source at all.

Answer 1

I'd didn't know of this work, despite more than three decades interest in English medieval genealogy, so I checked it on FamilySearch. As it does not cite sources the reader can have no idea about where a particular statement came from, so it is definitely not a reliable source as defined for Wikitree:

the most reliable secondary sources are ones that carefully cite primary sources. Conversely, the least reliable secondary sources are ones that do not reference any primary sources. This means that the information in them cannot be independently verified. It is second-hand information.

These books should therefore be regarded only as hints to target research in reliable sources. Given the focus in the introduction of volume 1 on royal descents of Americans, much of the content of these books has probably been superseded by Richardson's Royal Ancestry series.

Answer 2

In the appendix of Volume V of "Royal Ancestry" by Douglas Richardson, it shows 5 various lines of descent for King William the Conqueror and his wife, Maud of Flanders from Charlemagne. If you know William the Conqueror is an ancestor, then this may be your answer.

Comments

I can trace my lines to Rev. Peter Bulkely b. Jan. 31, 1583 d. Mar. 9, 1659 and from the research I've done over the years, apparently his lines trace back to William the Conqueror. In Volume II, in the Foreward of the book, there are at least 82 pages mentioning the names of sources, some which they used and others for guidance. But that is all it is, just the names of the sources with no pictures of documents. And in the lineages themselves are no references to which sources were used, which is very frustrating. Some of the lines from Rev. Bulkely I have been able to prove, some I am still working on.

Thank you Kim and Andrew for your advice!

---

Your ancestor is listed in both the Magna Carta books and Royal Ancestry books. But his name is Bulkeley. Rev. Peter Bulkeley of Concord, MA. I have the royal ancestry series by Douglas Richardson. I found your ancestor, Peter Bulkelely (as spelled in book) on page 10, vol., II. It says he was born at Odell, Bedfordshire, 31 Jan 1582. He is the 6th child of Dr. Edward Bulkeley and Olive Irby.

---

I have him being married to Grace Chetwood, (Chetwode). So is Bulkeley the correct and accepted spelling of the name? One of the sources I have is New England, The Great Migration and The Great Migration Begins, 1620-1635 which states he and his family came over in 1635 on the ship the Susan and Ellen.

---

Looks like Bulkeley is how the name was spelled at that time. He was married twice. Grace Chetwode was is 2nd wife. It says he and his family sailed on the Susan & Ellen in 1635. They initially settled in Cambridge, MA.

Your ancestor is considered a “Gateway” ancestor, meaning his line can be traced to the Magna Carta Baron, Saher de Quincy. I have the “Royal Ancestry” 5 volume series and it has been invaluable in my research.

---

Just checked out those books....wow! They are expensive. Which one for now would be the most helpful?

---

They are expensive. I used my Amazon prime Chase card and paid over time with no interest.

Unfortunately, there is not one book that is more helpful than the others. The books go by alphabetical order of surnames. Volume I has the Plantagenet and Norman Kings, and the England and Scot Kings. Volume V Index has the five ways to Charlemagne.

I wish you all the best in researching your ancestors. For me, it has been a wild ride.