There has been too much made of the connection of William Learned of Bermondsey, County Surry, with such others as "John", "Richard", "Isaac", and "Robert". Point one: There has been NO attempt at citation whatsoever for such important information with EITHER of the afore-mentioned names suggesting even a remote connection with William as of this posting. I have even read that the names of those alledged relations were spelled "Leonard"! Mid-twentieth century historiographer C.E. Banks after much investigation was thoroughly convinced that the two surnames were completely diffent families. Point two: The suggestion that William was born on Jan. 1, 1590 is absurd. William would have to have been 16 years old at the time of his marriage to Goodith Gilman recorded in St. Olave's church registry in 1606 where they were married. Marriages for men in any case very nearly always occurred after completion of apprenticeship (usually until after 21 years of age) and even so averaged 27 years of age. It is interesting to note that it was VERY common to marry OLDER women at that time in English culture. Point three: Eugenia Learned James book is a plagarized version of the books, "The Learned Genealogy" by jurist William Law Learned, even so much as to faithfully include the same typographical and grammatical errors. I have personally researched in person the locations of documents that W.L. Learned may not have been aware of in his time of horse and buggy to prove conclusively several errors that the judge had made and were still included in the James book. Point four: As to William returning to England, Edward Johnson who wrote the earliest town records of Woburn, Massachusetts Bay Colony, noted simply Williams death in Mar. 1645/6 and on the next line mentions a marriage of one of William's issue. I hope this helps clarify these concerns.