RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Kent => Topic started by: suecee on Monday 25 July 22 11:00 BST (UK)
-
I have two birth dates and baptisms for a THOMAS NOAKES f. THOMAS in Benenden taken from transcripts on a KentFHS CD.
born 24 Dec 1687, bap. 9 Jan 1688
born 21 Feb 1691, bap. 29 Mar 1691
I am assuming that the first Thomas died before 1691 but cannot find a burial for him.
Every tree on Ancestry has Thomas Noakes as being born in 1687 as that is the only baptism listed on Ancestry.
Can anyone verify the 1691 baptism for me and/or find a burial for the 1687 Thomas. Previous and later children were born in Benenden so I would assume any burial would be there.
Many thanks.
-
The 9th January baptism looks more like Thomas son of James (& Susan) - image on FindMyPast
-
Sorry I had posted the wrong information on the other baptism - start again ;D
Transcript has Thomas son of James & Susan born 21 Feb 1691 bapt 29 March 1691 St George, Benenden
IMAGE - There is no baptism on 29th March for a Noakes/Nokes child though there is one on 16th March for a James son of James & Susan born February 20th
-
Hi
Had a look at the 1691 one and it is brother James not Thomas son of James and Susan.
The indexer has mixed it up with the next entry for Thomas Hunt.
So only one son Thomas Noakes ,the one 1688
Ciderdrinker
-
Oops ;D I meant f. JAMES and m. SUSANNAH (Had Thomas on the brain)
So you are saying between you that there is
Thomas s. of James and Susan bap. 9 Jan 1688
and
James s. of James and Susan bap. 16 Mar 1691
James is a surprise as neither Henry nor his brother John mention a brother James in their wills of 1741 and 1772 respectively.
Looks like James died in 1719 so that’s not surprising.
But now I see there may be a Richard 1700 too - more food for thought.
Thanks to both of you ☺️
-
Oops ;D I meant f. JAMES and m. SUSANNAH (Had Thomas on the brain)
So you are saying between you that there is
Thomas s. of James and Susan bap. 9 Jan 1688
and
James s. of James and Susan bap. 16 Mar 1691
James is a surprise as neither Henry nor his brother John mention a brother James in their wills of 1741 and 1772 respectively.
Looks like James died in 1719 so that’s not surprising.
But now I see there may be a Richard 1700 too - more food for thought.
Thanks to both of you ☺️
It wouldn't be that common for people to mention siblings unless the person making the will were childless, or the sibling in question was disabled or perhaps a poor widow or widower with lots of children to care for. Also the brother James could well have been dead by the time the siblings died. James Noakes of Benenden left a will, made 1722 and proved in 1727 at the Archdeaconry Court of Canterbury as you can see below:
Will Noakes James Benenden 1722 1727 PRC/17/86/44b PRC/16/388 N/2 1727
https://wills.canterbury-cathedral.org/
Canterbury and Kent Archives at Maidstone hold microfilms of the original and register copies, Maidstone also holds the originals if they survive, but are not usually available for inspection unless the microfilm is illegible.
-
Thanks melba_schmelba
The James Noakes who died in 1727 was the father of all the brothers. He was the innkeeper of the Bull Hotel, Benenden and his son Henry took over when he died.
John Noakes who died in 1772 only had the one son John but had such a large estate he was able to be very generous to all the children of his siblings.
I am guessing that the 1719 burial in Benenden must have been the son James.
-
Kentish Memorial inscriptions can be really helpful but it doesn't seem that the Noakes family have any known burial location.
http://burials.benendenchurch.org/index2.htm
-
Thanks Bearkat, the Noakes are difficult to trace from birth to death as few of mine seem to stay in one place for much more than one generation and then disappear well out of area to marry.
I suspect there are missing parish records especially for the Benenden/Lamberhurst area. It doesn’t help that they move across to Ticehurst when there are already Noakes in the Ticehurst/Burwash area - and so many are called John or Thomas. ???
-
Do the records on The Weald website help?
https://www.theweald.org/a12.asp?QId=141501110&astart=0&aend=170000000
-
Thank you Bearkat, I’d forgotten all about the Weald website. There are quite a few NOAKES but sadly the gaps it has are the ones I need.
I am still looking for the marriage of THOMAS NOAKES (1687 Benenden) to ELIZABETH some time before 1719 when their first child Elizabeth was baptised in Lamberhurst.
The majority of trees for Thomas 1687 of Benenden have the marriage of THOMAS NOAKES to ELIZABETH ARCHLEY 15 Oct 1717 Warehorne but apart from the right date it didn’t seem right as it is just that bit too far away from Benenden and Lamberhurst.
So I’ve done further research of Noakes in that area.
There were two other NOAKES marriages in Warehorne around the same time (Henry 1715 and Elizabeth 1716) suggesting a Noakes family already in the area, not any Noakes from Benenden.
There were baptisms of an Elizabeth 1695 and a Thomas 1697/8 in Woodchurch - couldn’t find Henry.
Both Henry and Thomas stayed in the area (Appledore/Woodchurch/Kennardington) so not my Henry (1700) or Thomas (1687) from Benenden.
The biggest reason for it NOT being Elizabeth ARCHLEY is that
ELIZABETH NOAKES, wife of THOMAS, was buried in Warehorne 31 Mar 1733!
(My Thomas died 1748 Lamberhurst and his wife Elizabeth died in 1771 in Lamberhurst)
There don’t appear to be any children for that marriage although the Lamberhurst baptisms do fit time wise, so I can see why people have added Elizabeth Archley as the mother of those children.
It looks like widowed Thomas married again to Margaret Nower in 1737 in Ebony and they had 5 surviving children, some born in Appledore, the rest in Kenardington.
This Thomas died in 1755 in Kenardington age 60 years and Margaret in 1765.
It is the patchiness of the Lamberhurst/Benenden records which is frustrating and the lack of images to search through for missing baptisms, marriages and burials. ???
-
Have you searched Kent and Sussex marriage licences?
-
Thank you Bearkat, I’d forgotten all about the Weald website. There are quite a few NOAKES but sadly the gaps it has are the ones I need.
I am still looking for the marriage of THOMAS NOAKES (1687 Benenden) to ELIZABETH some time before 1719 when their first child Elizabeth was baptised in Lamberhurst.
The majority of trees for Thomas 1687 of Benenden have the marriage of THOMAS NOAKES to ELIZABETH ARCHLEY 15 Oct 1717 Warehorne but apart from the right date it didn’t seem right as it is just that bit too far away from Benenden and Lamberhurst.
[SNIP]
It is the patchiness of the Lamberhurst/Benenden records which is frustrating and the lack of images to search through for missing baptisms, marriages and burials. ???
Ancestry doesn't have the images for Kent parish registers, Kent Archives worked with Findmypast to get these scanned so they have them, excepting for the Medway Archives who have scanned their own and put them onto pdfs, which Findmypast link to.
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-Records/kent-county-council-parish-register-browse
Re: finding Thomas & Elizabeth's marriage, I definitely wouldn't ignore marriages some distance away. As with the marriage of Henry Noakes in Battle earlier, people might go some distance to a big town or city to get married, sometimes because their marriage was not approved of locally, or sometimes just to have a nice day out! I've found many Kent marriages as far as Lewes in the west, or London in the north. Sometimes only a license might survive. Findmypast has the vicar general and faculty office license index. A very few of these I think are here, otherwise you have to pay the SOG for a copy
London, England, Crisp's Marriage Licence Index, 1713-1892
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/collections/1768/
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-Records/faculty-office-marriage-licences
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-records/vicar-general-marriage-licences (only indexed by surname)
there is also London and Surrey, England, Marriage Bonds and Allegations, 1597-1921 which also covers some Essex marriages and people from Kent who married in London
https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/2056/
and this which covers Kent 1568-1750
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-Records/britain-marriage-licences
and also the London Clandestine marriage records (i.e. Liberty of the Fleet etc.) 1667-1754 which includes many marriages of people from outside London
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/collections/5344/
And lastly, people didn't always get married. It might be worth checking in the Benenden register to see if there were any illegitimate children born to an Elizabeth just before Thomas and Elizabeth started having children.
-
Thank you for all those links melba_schmelba
I’ve been through them all and drawn a complete blank.
I can’t find another Thomas Noakes/ Elizabeth marriage anywhere or anything that might have been mistranscribed.
As the Warehorne Thomas and Elizabeth stayed in the area and there is no other possible marriage for them, I have to conclude that it is my Thomas and Elizabeth marriage that is missing.
There was an Elizabeth Paine who had illegitimate children baptised in 1712 but otherwise there were no other base borns in Benenden at all.
I’m also puzzled by the baptism of a RICHARD NOAKES on the same day as brother HENRY on 13 Aug 1700.
This baptism appears on findmypast, ancestry and family search but not on my KentFHS CD rom (which I’ve found does have mistranscriptions and omissions).
Is he a twin that didn’t survive, for whom there is no marriage or burial or is he a figment of a transcribers imagination?
-
From the original images of the Benenden baptisms for 1770
13th August - Henry Son of James & Susanna NOAKES born 2nd day of July last past (the words Henry & Susanna must have been added later as they are written with a different ink)
There were a couple of Richards baptised that year but neither of them were Noakes
-
Thank you for all those links melba_schmelba
I’ve been through them all and drawn a complete blank.
I can’t find another Thomas Noakes/ Elizabeth marriage anywhere or anything that might have been mistranscribed.
As the Warehorne Thomas and Elizabeth stayed in the area and there is no other possible marriage for them, I have to conclude that it is my Thomas and Elizabeth marriage that is missing.
Looking at the way the marriages were recorded in the Lamberhurst register around that period, they seem to have been recorded in a rather untidy haphazard way, it could be that they were copied from the vicar's or clerk's notebooks and were done so unreliably. Perhaps it might be worth checking a bishops transcript if one survives. Or it might be as I said, that they never married, perhaps because they had already had an illegitimate child together which everyone knew about, and so the local vicar was not approving of marrying them, but also did not want to go to a London parish or clandestine marriage place where their circumstances would not be known. Or it could also be because one of them had been abandoned by their partner, and in those days divorce was not possible, but you could also not remarry without proof of death of the other spouse without falling foul of bigamy laws.
Interestingly though, this book suggests a couple merely had to say "I marry you" in front of witnesses and it was accepted they were married, or just say "I will marry you", but this became less accepted by the church later into the 18th century
Living in Sin- Cohabiting as Husband and Wife in Nineteenth-century England
By Ginger Frost · 2013 Manchester University Press
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Living_in_sin/62S5DwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22common%20law%20marriages%22%20england&pg=PT23&printsec=frontcover
-
From the Familysearch catalogue:
Benenden
Archdeacon's transcripts contd.: Baptisms, marriages and burials 1680-1812 (missing: 1681/2, 1708/9, 1718/9, 1724/5, 1725/6, 1728/9, 1729/30, 1731/2, 1738/9)
-
I know it is possible that Thomas and Elizabeth didn’t marry but the rest of the siblings did so it is more than likely that this is just one of the records for the Benenden/Lamberhurst area that cannot be found. (There are several baptisms and burials that I know should be there but I can’t find)
Fortunately it is Henry I am descended from but I hate loose ends >:(
I am trying to get a copy of James Noakes 1727 will, a somewhat clunky process, and maybe that may be of some help.
Thanks for your help everyone.
-
There is a very interesting history of the parish of Benenden
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01rro/
I can't see any mention of the Noakes.
It says that the burial registers for 1734 to 1748 are missing.