Perrot de Neele
French composer
Perrot (Peron, Peros, or Pierrot) de Neele (fl. mid–late 13th century) was an Artesian trouvère and littérateur. He composed four jeux partis in collaboration with Jehan Bretel (died 1272): "Amis Peron de Neele"; "Jehan Bretel, respondés"; "Pierrot de Neele, amis"; and "Pierrot, li ques vaut pis a fin amant". Perrot also composed one song in praise of the Virgin Mary, "Douce vierge, röine nete et pure", with a melody that is in bar form. Finally, there survives in manuscript B.N. fr. 375 a collection of narrative verse (or "classic literary works") entitled Sommaires en vers de poèmes and compiled by Perrot, who identifies himself in a colophon at the end of the work:
This manuscript has sometimes been dated to 1288 because of a colophon to the copy of the Roman de Troie which it contains. This copy was finished in 1288 by Jehan Madot. The manuscript was the work of at least five scribes, as five different hands have been identified in its texts. Probably it was put together in the early fourteenth century. Perrot's Sommaire serves as a table of contents for the entire codex, summarising in verse the narrative romances contained within.
“Perrot de Neele” enters the record as french composer. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Perrot, Neele and French can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Perrot de Neele” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Perrot, Neele and French provides the most credible route into that argument.
Biographical claims are most persuasive when dates, appointments and relationships can be traced to records created close to the events described. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 3, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q3900083. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1272 and 1288.
Public reputation and documentary evidence do not always develop together; absence from a summary is not evidence of historical absence. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Perrot de Neele”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Perrot de Neele primary sources, Perrot de Neele archive and Perrot research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Perrot de Neele”?
- How has the subject’s reputation changed across later accounts?
- Which claims depend on a single source or contested interpretation?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Perrot de Neele” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.