|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
|---|---|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
From "Genealogy of the Bliss Family", by Aaron Tyler Bliss; Living between the years 1180 and 1240 was a man who was nicknamed "Blisse", and when surnames were required, his son adopted the nickname as an additional discription of himself. We can assume the Blisse was a tiller of the soil, and from the discussion to follow it is at least a reasonable assumption that he resided on a manor in County Buckingham (England). And with these reasonable (though unsupportable) assumptionsof his status and his location, it is fortunate indeed that, by virtue of his name, we know very much what he was like. If names are in fact significant in their first application to individuals, then here was a man who had a blissful state ofmind. He was not born with the name, but called by it, and he had a son who adopted it. Judging by the time that surnames were required and by the lowly position that our happy Blisse occupied, we will assume that the first Blisse of record,John Blisse, was a son, or more probably a grandson.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Bliss is from the Welsh "blys" signifying deserving longing. The same as the Bolis family of Normandy. The English family dates back to the Norman Conquest.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The Domesday Book was the first national accounting of England's wealth in 1086. No Bliss appeared in that survey. However, in 1272, we find two Blisses. In 1270 Prince Edward embarked upon the Seventh Crusade. The King, Henry III, diedwhile the Prince was away and Edward I, upon returning, made an inquiry to ascertain the exact state of the royal domain and of the rights and revenues of the Crown, much of which, during the previous turbulent times, had been ursurped by clergyand laity. "The Hundred Role" was the result, and in it we find the Bliss family near it's very birth. A jury was formed in each "hundred" of the realm ( a hundred being one of several divisions of a county). All title of land was held by theKing, but the rights to use the land was delegated to the lords, who paid taxes or some fee for it's use. These lords would in turn "rent" the land to lesser lords who were thus required to pay fees to the superior lord. The appearance of twoBlisses in the Hundred Role of 1272 gives us not only a view of a family who had increased somewhat in wealth, but of a family who had just recently adopted a surname. The Hundred Role entries: "County of Buckingham (Bunstone Hundred)(Parish ofTyringham) with Filgrave. John Blisse (and twenty others) each of them holds six acres and one rood, and the service of each of them is worth yearly in all services and aids 5 shillings, and they pay redemption of blood. County Cambridge,(Hundred of North Stowe)(Town of Waterbeche), John Blisse holds one messuage and pays yearly 3 shillings 3 pence (with Geoffrey the merchant and Ralph the merchant) and that messuage contains 3 roods of land."
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The first enumerated Bliss, John Blisse of Tyringham is in the better position of these two men, and may well have been the father of the second John Blisse.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The entire entry for John Blisse of Tyringham is not here presented, but his situation as described in the original entry shows that Roger de Somery had leased the property to Roger de Tyringham for 6s.8d. per year and scutage (a sum ofmoney in lieu of any military service that might be required). There were six men living on the manor who were above John Blisse, and twenty who were of his station. Ten men were beneath him by reason of not paying "redemption of blood" (a feewhich was paid to release a man's sons from bondage to the lord of the manor). Below these men were actual slaves.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Forty-five miles down the river Ouse from Tyringham is Waterbeche. The John Blisse who lived there in 1272 was likely a son of our Tyringham ancestor. He was paying less for his "messuage" (dwelling house and the immediate surroundingland and out-buildings). He owned less land, paid no redemption of blood and probably sold his labor to the merchant
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
John Blisse of Tyringham was a villein (a feudal serf) , with no rights except that the lord not kill or maim him, or attack any of his females. He was a mere chattel attached to a piece of land. If the land were sold, he went with it. But in respect of men other than his lord, he had the rights of a freeman. He could bear arms, acquire property, be a legal witness, sue and be sued, be fined and serve on a jury. The villein disposed of his tilling and occupancy privileges tohis sons, and after some time these "privileges" became "rights" , vested only against the lord as long as the villein performed the required services. The lord demanded "rent" and an oath of fealty, the latter of which became the mostoppressive. With the oath of fealty the villein was bound to fight wars in which he had no interest. The greed of the lords and kings above him frequently threw him into battles in the 14th century, and this no doubt accounts for some of theearly migration of the Bliss family into other parts of England. The villein also had to pay homage to his lord, a ceremony which would have been totally unacceptable to his Anglo-Saxon forefathers. By 1400, statutes also limited the"rights"of the villein. No child of an tiller of the soil could become an apprentice in the town. The universities were closed to the children of all villeins. The discrimination of this class system can be appreciated today by merely looking at thedefinition given the word "villain"; a scoundrel. More appropriately an etymological source will show that the word was originally descriptive of one who merely dwelled in a "ville".
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
A few early records of the 14th century were uncovered by Charles Arthur Hoppin in his years of research for "The Bliss Book" in England. Virtually none of his findings regarding the very early Bliss family have come under attack bycritics, but his broad assumptions relating to the first Bliss emigrants in 1638 have been met with disapproval. Regarding the emigrants, his work applies only to the Rehoboth and Newport lines of the family. Nothing of import can be found inhis book regarding the Hartford line. Among the Blisses found were William and John Blisse at Little Sampford, Essex in 1307. They were thought to be son and grandson respectively of John Blisse of Waterbeche, who we had previously found to bea likely son of John Blisse of Tyringham.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
From John Blisse of Tyringham, living in 1272 (and born perhaps about 1225), a gap exists which will not be closed by further research. The Dark Ages, and the wars within them, became even darker. Not until about 1460 do we find recordswhich tell us of a Blisse who is a likely direct line ancestor to two branches of the family; and for the third branch we must be patient to the point of emigration, as the names of the ancestors of Thomas Bliss who settled in Hartford, Conn.have not been proven.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The genealogical chart rendered in "The Bliss Book" contained two grave errors. First of all, Thomas Bliss of Hartford was incorrectly assigned the ancestry of Thomas Bliss who settled in Rehoboth, Massachusetts. An article by G. AndrewsMoriarty in "The Boston Transcript", July 26, 1915, wherin Hoppins theory that Thomas Blisse of Hartford, Conn. was from Daventry or Preston Capes, Northamptonshire is successfully refuted, and Thomas Blisse of Rehoboth is shown as the PrestonCapes resident. The two men had also been confused in the "Genealogy of the Bliss Family", by John Homer Bliss, and we hope that the confusion ends herewith. Secondly, the first cousin relationship between Thomas Bliss of Hartford and theThomas Bliss of Rohoboth is not supported by any evidence. Thomas Bliss of Rehoboth and George Bliss of Newport, Rhode Island were brothers. That they were cousins to Thomas Bliss of Hartford is not disputed by any scholarly work, but thedegree of cousinship has not been determined because the ancestry of Thomas of Hartford remains unsolve
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The coat-of-arms and motto "Quod severis metes" (you reap what you sow). The shield is silver and has a blue cottised band across it. Upon the top of the shield is one golden sheaf of wheat on a wreath. Upon the band are three goldensheaves of wheat. Helmets and mantling (exterior decoration representing a knight's cloak) have become optional in the rendering of a family coat-of-arms, and are used for decorative purposes only. No hint of royalty is within the design.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
It is proper to make mention of another coat-of-arms which has been erroneously borne by many Blisses in the last century. John Homer Bliss, having delegated the work of researching in England to another, displayed the arms of the BloisFamily. This occurred by reason of entrusting the English research to a genealogist who in fact did no research at all; rather he merely assumed that the name Bliss must have been a derivation of the name Blois. This assumption led to afurther assumption which seems to have been the genealogist's goal; to demonstrate a royal heritage for the family. To protect his fabricated story, he placed our ancestors in the remote area of Belstone, Devonshire. The truth is that noperson by the name of Bliss had ever lived in that area prior to 1800. On January 1, 1909, John Homer Bliss sent a two-page letter to all owners of his "Bliss Genealogy", of whom he had a record, conceding the inaccuracy of the informationsupplied; and acknowledging Charles A. Hoppin's then recent findings.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
From "Ancestral Lines Revised" by Carl Boyer: "Apparently the Bliss family has been one of those plagued with false pedigrees, which, once in print, are to often copied and handed down as the truth". The line as given in John Homer Bliss'"Genealogy of the Bliss Family in America" (1881) was attributed to work done by an unnamed English genealogist and forwarded to Mr. Bliss by a correspondent. It was refuted by Charles Arthur Hoppin in "The Bliss Book" (1913) in a verythorough fashion. Hoppin stated that no Bliss lived in the parish of Belstone, Devonshire, until long after the Bliss immigrants came to New England, and that the nature of the locality did not support the story of wealthy Bliss landownersthere. Furthermore, civil and religious documents did not substantiate the idea that any member of the family in any part of England had risen to high station in life.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Finding the Bliss name in the records as early as the thirteenth century, Hoppin concluded that there have been only eight variations in the spelling, excepting a couple of instances attributed to clerical error, namely Bliss, Blis, Blisse,Bles, Blyss, Blysse, and Blys, and that the name was of Saxon origin. Boyer stated that some early members of the family were John Blysse of Tyringham, Buckinghamshire, about 1230, William Blysse of Cranfield, Bedfordshire, and Phillip Blysseof Wooten, Northamptonshire.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
There is no proven relationship between Thomas Bliss of Rehoboth and the immigrant of the same name in Hartford, Connecticut.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Richard Blysse was born about 1460 to 1465, lived in Daventry, Northamptonshire, England.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Daventry is a market town in the Hundred of Fawsley, Deanery of Daventry, Archdeaconry of Northampton, Diocese of Peterborough, located seventy-two miles from London on "the great road" to Chester and twelve miles from Northampton. Theruins of an ancient Roman encampment are nearby.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The first Bliss of record there was Henry Blysse, miller and mercer (one who finished and dealt with woven cloth), brother of Richard. The document was dated October 8, 1518. Henry VII (1502) (see Manor Court Rolls, Duchy of Lancaster,No. 105-1500, cited in Hoppin, 105). Henry Blysse was dead by 1524.
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
A chancery case dated to about 1558 concerning "hys demeane as of ffee of and in three messuages or tentes wth thapprtnances in Daventree" gave Richard Blysse, "the elder brother to the sayd Henry Blysse," as the father of Richard. nonetheless the claim of the descendants of Thomas Blysse of Leamington, Warwickshire, to the property, was recognized, indicating that he may have been elder to both Richard and Henry (see Proceedings in Chancery, Elizabeth B-16-14, P.R.O.,cited in Hoppin, 197).
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Child listed in the Chancery Proceedings: Richard
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Bibliography:
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The History of Rehoboth by Dr. John G. Ehardt
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Rehoboth by Arnold
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Ancestral Lines Revised by Carl Boyer
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Genealogy of the Bliss Family by Aaron Tyler Bliss 1982
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The Bliss Book by Charles Hoppin
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Genealogy of the Bliss Family in America from 1550-1880 by John H. Bliss 1881
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Early Rehoboth by Richard LeBaron Bowen Vol. I-IV
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
A Genealogy Dic. of the First Settlers of New England by James Savage 1860-1862
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Directory of Ancestral Heads New England Families by Frank Holmes 1923
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
Pope's Pioneers of Massachusetts
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
New England Historical & Genealogical Register, Vol. 3 p.189, Vol. 4 p.282
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
The Ancestory of Lorenzo Ackley & his wife Emma Bosworth by G. Park 1960
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
|
NOTEWFT:CONT
|
|
| Given names | Surname | Sosa | Birth | Place | Death | Age | Place | Last change | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
about 1462
|
562 | 1 | 521 | 41 | M | YES | YES | |||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||