Hello,

I am new to the group and very new to doing genealogical research and I would appreciate some help in researching my Taylor line.

If I follow one line, it takes me from Hanger Taylifer to Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer which states that he is a son of Aymer, Count of Angouleme.

The problems with that timeline are the following:
1) The various dob's not synching up with the ancestor or partner;
2) I can't find that Aymer had any other children other than Isabella who married King John of England.

In the other line, it pretty much ends as Hanger's father having the name of William Tayilifer with a dob of 1200 and the trail ends there.

If anyone could help me with this, I would appreciate it very much.

I am keeping my information/research on an Excel spreadsheet right now so as to allow me to update as I am able to find additional information. I am willing to share the file with anyone who would like it. I would only add the note that all of my
research has been online with no library digging so it could be incorrect if the sources I used were not correct.

Thank you so much for your time and possible assistance.

Barbara B Hale
(276) 337-3550

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 9:14:27 PM UTC-8, bbh...@yahoo.com wrote:

Hello,

I am new to the group and very new to doing genealogical research and I would appreciate some help in researching my Taylor line.

If I follow one line, it takes me from Hanger Taylifer to Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer which states that he is a son of Aymer, Count of Angouleme.

The problems with that timeline are the following:
1) The various dob's not synching up with the ancestor or partner;
2) I can't find that Aymer had any other children other than Isabella who married King John of England.

In the other line, it pretty much ends as Hanger's father having the name of William Tayilifer with a dob of 1200 and the trail ends there.

If anyone could help me with this, I would appreciate it very much.

Not sure this is what you had in mind by help, but the sorry truth is that it is all made up. All of it. Aymer existed, and he left a sole known child, Isabelle, wife successively of King John and of Hugh X de Lusignan. The name William Frank de Borsale
Taylifer is an absurdity. He was probably first conjured into existence with a simpler name but then progressively elaborated to give a false sense of gentility. Even Hanger is not a normal name from the culture and period. It is seriously problematic,
likely either invented or garbled, perhaps both.

I strongly suspect that you need to look father down the pedigree before you come to the first authentic ancestor in this claimed tree. The overwhelming majority of Taylors descend from tradesmen, not nobility, and these tradesmen cannot be traced
earlier than the 16th century. However, there is a long history of Taylor 'genealogists' letting their imagination run wild, and inventing ancestral lines to the Counts of Angouleme, because a few of them used a personal nickname (not a surname) that
was superficially similar, and because nobody brags about descending from people who actually performed a skilled trade for a living.

taf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, taf wrote:

On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 9:14:27 PM UTC-8, bbh...@yahoo.com wrote:

Hello,

I am new to the group and very new to doing genealogical research and I would appreciate some help in researching my Taylor line.

If I follow one line, it takes me from Hanger Taylifer to Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer which states that he is a son of Aymer, Count of Angouleme.

The problems with that timeline are the following:
1) The various dob's not synching up with the ancestor or partner;
2) I can't find that Aymer had any other children other than Isabella who married King John of England.

In the other line, it pretty much ends as Hanger's father having the name of William Tayilifer with a dob of 1200 and the trail ends there.

If anyone could help me with this, I would appreciate it very much.

Not sure this is what you had in mind by help, but the sorry truth is that it is all made up. All of it. Aymer existed, and he left a sole known child, Isabelle, wife successively of King John and of Hugh X de Lusignan. The name William Frank de

Borsale Taylifer is an absurdity. He was probably first conjured into existence with a simpler name but then progressively elaborated to give a false sense of gentility. Even Hanger is not a normal name from the culture and period. It is seriously
problematic, likely either invented or garbled, perhaps both.

I strongly suspect that you need to look father down the pedigree before you come to the first authentic ancestor in this claimed tree. The overwhelming majority of Taylors descend from tradesmen, not nobility, and these tradesmen cannot be traced

earlier than the 16th century. However, there is a long history of Taylor 'genealogists' letting their imagination run wild, and inventing ancestral lines to the Counts of Angouleme, because a few of them used a personal nickname (not a surname) that was
superficially similar, and because nobody brags about descending from people who actually performed a skilled trade for a living.

taf

I guess Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer could be the name of someone born in the mid-1800s or later. Her original post is a little vague on that. Maybe she's indicating Hanger Taylifer is the son of Aymer?

But correct, no one born near the time of Aymer, Count of Angouleme, would have more than one given name.

Guilliaume William Frank De Borsale Taylifer rather reminds me of "Gen. George Henry De Strabolgie Neville Plantagenet-Harrison."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 10:40:36 AM UTC-5, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:

Well Hanger Taylefer alias Taylor did exist, at least according to Burke's

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Genealogical_and_Heraldic_Dictionary_of/0NEKAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Humphrey%20de%20Fairsted&pg=PA1358&printsec=frontcover

Some intrepid amateur has put his father as this wild name you mentioned, but there is no source for it.
I would suggest that his *name* was not "Frank" but rather that someone has decided that he must be *a* "Frank"
That is, a person from that area of France inhabited by the "Franks" (a race, not a name)

And of course William is just the modern English version of Guillaume, so that's the exact same name

Hanger Taylefer is apparently mentioned in Dugdale, 4:289.https://www.google.com/books/edition/Notes_and_Queries/t7URAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=hanger+ospringe&pg=PA308&printsec=frontcover

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Well Hanger Taylefer alias Taylor did exist, at least according to Burke's

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Genealogical_and_Heraldic_Dictionary_of/0NEKAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Humphrey%20de%20Fairsted&pg=PA1358&printsec=frontcover

Some intrepid amateur has put his father as this wild name you mentioned, but there is no source for it.
I would suggest that his *name* was not "Frank" but rather that someone has decided that he must be *a* "Frank"
That is, a person from that area of France inhabited by the "Franks" (a race, not a name)

And of course William is just the modern English version of Guillaume, so that's the exact same name

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 6:50:47 AM UTC-8, Johnny Brananas wrote:

On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 1:23:10 AM UTC-5, taf wrote:

On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 9:14:27 PM UTC-8, bbh...@yahoo.com wrote:

If I follow one line, it takes me from Hanger Taylifer to Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer which states that he is a son of Aymer, Count of Angouleme.

The name William Frank de Borsale Taylifer is an absurdity. He was probably first conjured into existence with a simpler name but then progressively elaborated to give a false sense of gentility. Even Hanger is not a normal name from the culture and

period. It is seriously problematic, likely either invented or garbled, perhaps both.

I guess Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer could be the name of someone born in the mid-1800s or later. Her original post is a little vague on that. Maybe she's indicating Hanger Taylifer is the son of Aymer?

I took the original post to mean that he was father of 'Hanger' and son of Alymer, and yes, the name is typical of the tipe 19th century people might use, not 13th century ones.

But correct, no one born near the time of Aymer, Count of Angouleme, would have more than one given name.

Just for the sake of pedantry, it depends on what you consider to be a 'given name'. There are occasional authentic cases in the general era of people with aliases, who appeared in their own time under different names individually or as X alias Y, but
almost never as a multi-part name just X-Y or X Y as they are often represented by modern historians and genealogists. These include examples where someone took a different regnal name (Dukes of Aquitaine, King of Leon/Castile), and women who adopted
alternative names more typical of the culture into which they married (think John's Scottish great-grandmother) or who were known by alternative nicknames such as Blanche or Dulce. The one with the most names that comes to mind in the general cultural
millieu, though a but earlier, is Guy Geoffrey alias William VIII of Aquitaine.

Then you have Iberia. In Toledo, the Mozarabs used a combination of Arabic naming and nicknaming and use of Castillian aliases that resulted in a contemporary of Aylmar being named Abd al-Aziz, Abu al-Asbagh, and Pedro Suarez. In Castile later in Aylmer'
s century a system began to appear in which the traditional patronymics become divorced of their original meaning, and simply formed a part of complex given name, for example, a set of siblings named Ines Alfonso, Pedro Lopez, Juan Sanchez, Elvira
Alvarez, Juana Garcia, Leonor Fernandez, etc.

taf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 7:54:27 AM UTC-8, Johnny Brananas wrote:

On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 10:40:36 AM UTC-5, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:

Well Hanger Taylefer alias Taylor did exist, at least according to Burke's

'at least according to Burke's' is not an expression that inspires faith.

Hanger Taylefer is apparently mentioned in Dugdale, 4:289.https://www.google.com/books/edition/Notes_and_Queries/t7URAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=hanger+ospringe&pg=PA308&printsec=frontcover

No 'apparently' about it:

https://books.google.com/books?id=4iALKS786G4C&pg=PA289

And it is not just a typesetting error or misread, as the same royal charter is read the same way, 'Hangeri', by Lewis in The History and Antiquities of the Abbey and Church of Favresham in Kent (1727):

https://books.google.com/books?id=9ndbAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA68

I still think it may well be a garbled rendering of some other name, only the scribe is to blame rather than the later historians.
taf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 20-Jan-23 5:23 PM, taf wrote:

On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 9:14:27 PM UTC-8, bbh...@yahoo.com wrote:

Hello,

I am new to the group and very new to doing genealogical research and I would appreciate some help in researching my Taylor line.

If I follow one line, it takes me from Hanger Taylifer to Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer which states that he is a son of Aymer, Count of Angouleme.

The problems with that timeline are the following:
1) The various dob's not synching up with the ancestor or partner;
2) I can't find that Aymer had any other children other than Isabella who married King John of England.

In the other line, it pretty much ends as Hanger's father having the name of William Tayilifer with a dob of 1200 and the trail ends there.

If anyone could help me with this, I would appreciate it very much.

Not sure this is what you had in mind by help, but the sorry truth is that it is all made up. All of it. Aymer existed, and he left a sole known child, Isabelle, wife successively of King John and of Hugh X de Lusignan. The name William Frank de

Borsale Taylifer is an absurdity. He was probably first conjured into existence with a simpler name but then progressively elaborated to give a false sense of gentility. Even Hanger is not a normal name from the culture and period. It is seriously
problematic, likely either invented or garbled, perhaps both.

I strongly suspect that you need to look father down the pedigree before you come to the first authentic ancestor in this claimed tree. The overwhelming majority of Taylors descend from tradesmen, not nobility, and these tradesmen cannot be traced

earlier than the 16th century. However, there is a long history of Taylor 'genealogists' letting their imagination run wild, and inventing ancestral lines to the Counts of Angouleme, because a few of them used a personal nickname (not a surname) that
was superficially similar, and because nobody brags about descending from people who actually performed a skilled trade for a living.

This is a case of false etymology anyway - the surname Taylor is, as you
say, from the trade of the tailor, derived from the Anglo-Norman
taillour (modern French tailleur) which simply means a non-specific
cutter, e.g. usually of cloth, or sometimes of gemstones etc.

There was an Anglo-Norman family surnamed Taillebois, from their
original toponym (the place in Normandy was presumably named from a woodcutter).

In the case of the first count of Angoulême to carry Taillefer (= iron
cutter) as a byname, Guillem II in the first half of the 10th century,
this allegedly came from his having cut with a single stroke through the
iron breast-plate and chest of a Viking. He was succeeded by a bastard
son, Arnaud Manzer, whose own son named after Guillem was also known as Taillefer presumably as a mark of continuity with the old high-born
lineage. The epithet subsequently became hereditary.

The uncommon forname Hanger also occurs in late-12th century charters
for St Mary's abbey, Dublin, pp. 126 and 204 here: https://books.google.com.au/books?id=vP4KAAAAYAAJ.

Peter Stewart


--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 3:40:14 PM UTC-8, mike davis wrote:

i thought it might have been a strange spelling of Henry but now you've
found this, i wonder if its a old danish/viking name introduced by the normans.

I had the same thought. Maybe a highly corrupted derivative of Angentheow. However, etymology is prone to be misled by coincidental false-cognates.

taf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 10:28:48 PM UTC, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:

On 20-Jan-23 5:23 PM, taf wrote:

On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 9:14:27 PM UTC-8, bbh...@yahoo.com wrote:

Hello,

I am new to the group and very new to doing genealogical research and I would appreciate some help in researching my Taylor line.

If I follow one line, it takes me from Hanger Taylifer to Guillaume William Frank de Borsale Taylifer which states that he is a son of Aymer, Count of Angouleme.

The problems with that timeline are the following:
1) The various dob's not synching up with the ancestor or partner;
2) I can't find that Aymer had any other children other than Isabella who married King John of England.

In the other line, it pretty much ends as Hanger's father having the name of William Tayilifer with a dob of 1200 and the trail ends there.

If anyone could help me with this, I would appreciate it very much.

Not sure this is what you had in mind by help, but the sorry truth is that it is all made up. All of it. Aymer existed, and he left a sole known child, Isabelle, wife successively of King John and of Hugh X de Lusignan. The name William Frank de

Borsale Taylifer is an absurdity. He was probably first conjured into existence with a simpler name but then progressively elaborated to give a false sense of gentility. Even Hanger is not a normal name from the culture and period. It is seriously
problematic, likely either invented or garbled, perhaps both.

I strongly suspect that you need to look father down the pedigree before you come to the first authentic ancestor in this claimed tree. The overwhelming majority of Taylors descend from tradesmen, not nobility, and these tradesmen cannot be traced

earlier than the 16th century. However, there is a long history of Taylor 'genealogists' letting their imagination run wild, and inventing ancestral lines to the Counts of Angouleme, because a few of them used a personal nickname (not a surname) that was
superficially similar, and because nobody brags about descending from people who actually performed a skilled trade for a living.

This is a case of false etymology anyway - the surname Taylor is, as you say, from the trade of the tailor, derived from the Anglo-Norman
taillour (modern French tailleur) which simply means a non-specific
cutter, e.g. usually of cloth, or sometimes of gemstones etc.

Unfortunately this false etymology is all over the net thanks to Burkes vol IV, p237-8,
where they specifically say that Hanger Taylefer was the descendant
of the Taillefer who fought with William at Hastings 1066 as recounted by Wace, and that Hanger was the ancestor of a John Taylor under Edward III 1336,
whose descendants Burkes goes on to describe. Somehow somebody has
turned this into a Hanger Taylefer 1256-1336, but it seems he only appears
in this Ospringe reference 1256 and in the charter of Henry III [1265?].

Another geni site says he was the son of William Tailefer [1200-74] of Borlase in
Cornwall and Maria Montgomery. He was supposedly the son of Aylmer III of Angouleme 1160-1202, so this descent falls down here, unless hes a bastard
son no one else has heard of.

The refs for this is "Royal Ancestry," Douglas Richardson, 2013 Vol. V. p. 310. I havnt seen this book so I dont know if it comes from this, cos every instance
I've seen of this "ancestry" looks garbled. Nevertheless its very pervasive,
as it seems just about every taylor in USA claims descent from Hanger.

There was an Anglo-Norman family surnamed Taillebois, from their
original toponym (the place in Normandy was presumably named from a woodcutter).

In the case of the first count of Angoulême to carry Taillefer (= iron cutter) as a byname, Guillem II in the first half of the 10th century,
this allegedly came from his having cut with a single stroke through the iron breast-plate and chest of a Viking. He was succeeded by a bastard
son, Arnaud Manzer, whose own son named after Guillem was also known as Taillefer presumably as a mark of continuity with the old high-born
lineage. The epithet subsequently became hereditary.

The uncommon forname Hanger also occurs in late-12th century charters
for St Mary's abbey, Dublin, pp. 126 and 204 here: https://books.google.com.au/books?id=vP4KAAAAYAAJ.

i thought it might have been a strange spelling of Henry but now you've
found this, i wonder if its a old danish/viking name introduced by the normans.

mike

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 11:47:00 PM UTC, taf wrote:

On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 3:40:14 PM UTC-8, mike davis wrote:

i thought it might have been a strange spelling of Henry but now you've found this, i wonder if its a old danish/viking name introduced by the normans.

I had the same thought. Maybe a highly corrupted derivative of Angentheow. However, etymology is prone to be misled by coincidental false-cognates.

taf

yes and in case anyone still believes in this Tailefer to Taylor connection theres an old discussion about this exact line here

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/311655/has-any-one-got-evidence-of-a-taylor-taillefer-connection

the answer is clearly no

Mike

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 23-Jan-23 1:14 AM, mike davis wrote:

On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 11:47:00 PM UTC, taf wrote:

On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 3:40:14 PM UTC-8, mike davis wrote:

i thought it might have been a strange spelling of Henry but now you've
found this, i wonder if its a old danish/viking name introduced by the normans.

I had the same thought. Maybe a highly corrupted derivative of Angentheow. However, etymology is prone to be misled by coincidental false-cognates.

taf

yes and in case anyone still believes in this Tailefer to Taylor connection theres an old discussion about this exact line here

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/311655/has-any-one-got-evidence-of-a-taylor-taillefer-connection

the answer is clearly no

Burke's invention of a "Norman baron" Taillefer who became ancestor of
Taylors is an embarrassment even by his shameless standards: the man of
this name mentioned by Wace was not a baron at all, but a juggler - for
details see William Sayers, The jongleur Taillefer at Hastings:
antecedents and literary fate, in *Viator* 14 (1983) 77-88.

Peter Stewart


--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 3:47:00 PM UTC-8, taf wrote:

On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 3:40:14 PM UTC-8, mike davis wrote:

i thought it might have been a strange spelling of Henry but now you've found this, i wonder if its a old danish/viking name introduced by the normans.

I had the same thought. Maybe a highly corrupted derivative of Angentheow. However, etymology is prone to be misled by coincidental false-cognates.

I have come across a completely different option for Hanger. Farrer reports a 12th century confirmation by a Hengered de Sai, whom he equates with a man elsewhere called Enguerrand or Ingelram.

taf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)