RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Surrey => Topic started by: jbml on Tuesday 01 September 26 09:23 BST (UK)
-
Things looked to be going so well ... and then a massive fly landed in the ointment.
The family name is sometimes spelled Holcombe, sometimes Holcomb, and sometimes Halcombe. On one occasion it is Hulcomb.
The names Eleanor (sometimes spelled Ellinor) and Helen (sometimes spelled Hellen) switch back and forth on a regular basis to the point that whenever you see Eleanor you should say to yourself "or Helen", and whenever you see Helen you should say to yourself "or Eleanor".
We have a very tidy family grouping; everything checks out, everything tallies, the records are nice and clear, and the story goes like this:
John Holcomb, bachelor of Horne in the county of Surrey, married Eleanor Holman, spinster of the parish of Worth in Sussex, after banns called on 22 April, 29 April and 6 May 1759. The marriage took place in Worth on 16 May 1759. They then lived together in Horne and baptised eight children:
John, on 5 June 1760
William, on 26 July 1761
Eleanor, on 17 November 1763
Ann, on 21 April 1765
Elizabeth, on 26 October 1766
Henne Ritta Maria, on 18 March 1768
James, on 14 June 1771
Philadelphia, on 7 May 1774
Having baptised all their children, they then moved 8 miles west to Charlwood, and started burying some of them.
Philadelphia, age 12 years 11 months, was buried on 26 March 1786
Elizabeth, in her 20th year, was buried on 23 April 1786
Helen (that's Eleanor ... ), age 29, was buried on 14 March 1797
Then it's the turn of the parents to die.
John Holcomb, age 81, was buried in Charlwood on 21 December 1809
Helen Holcomb, age 77, widow of John, was buried in Charlwood on 26 October 1812.
It's all so neat, tidy and perfect ... until you start trying to find John Holcomb's baptism and understand his family.
There is a baptism which definitely LOOKS as though it should be him: John Halcomb, son of Benjamin and Ann, baptised in Godstone on 7 March 1725/6. He has an older brother Robert (baptised 19 April 1723), a younger sister Mary (baptised 22 March 1731/2) and a younger brother Thomas (baptised 3 September 1735).
So where's the fly? It's buzzing around Godstone burial ground, in the form of a memorial inscription.
John's sister Mary Hulcomb married John Burchett in Coates cum Burton, Sussex on 3 January 1754. They had a daughter Elizabeth Burchett who was baptised in Godstone on 14 August 1758. Mary was buried in Godstone on 18 August 1758 and the infant Elizabeth was buried on 1 October 1758.
Mary and Elizabeth are buried in the same grave and the memorial inscription records that Mary was 27 years old.
Benjamin Holcomb was buried in the same grave on 3 March 1782. His age at death, according to the inscription, was 86. The inscription on the grave mistakenly described him as the grandfather of Mary Burchett. He was, of course, the FATHER of Mary Burchett, and the Grandfather of ELIZABETH Burchett.
Thomas Holcombe was buried in the same grave on 9 November 1788. He was said to be 55 years of age, and the same blunder was made with the inscription: he is described as the uncle of Mary Burchett, whereas he was in fact the brother of Mary Burchett and uncle of Elizabeth Burchett.
Finally, Ann Holcomb and John Holcomb were both buried in the same grave in 1789. (The National Burial Index has Ann buried on 9 November 1788; but the memorial inscription gives the year of death as 1789. John was buried on 10 December 1789.)
This, too, looks like a complete, self-contained and self-explanatory family group.
All of which means, I think, that John Holcomb who married Helen Holman cannot have been John Holcomb, son of Benjamin and Ann: he is fully accounted for.
And so to the question: who the devil WAS this John Holcomb who married Helen Holman? I am at a loss here. It may be that the records simply have not survived and we shall never know. But the RootsChat detectives love a challenge like this ... so any suggestions that look worthy of following up, no matter how implausible they seem, would be gratefully received.
[Someone's bound to ask about Helen: she was Helen Holman, daughter of John and Hellen, baptised in Worth on 5 November 1735. She had older siblings John, Henrietta, James, Richard (who died before she was born) and twins Joseph and Philadelphia. She also had a younger sister called Catherine. The recurrence of the names Henrietta and Philadelphia among her own children give me a very high degree of confidence that this is an accurate identification.]
-
Have you considered John Hokam, son of James & Sarah, baptised 4 Feb 1730 at Henfield? Found on Familysearch.
-
Have you considered John Hokam, son of James & Sarah, baptised 4 Feb 1730 at Henfield? Found on Familysearch.
I have not ... good shout. It looks pretty plausible, doesn't it?
-
Not that it answers your question FreeREG also has extra children to John/Eleanor ie Helen;
RICHARD 02 Jun 1776 + ANNABELLA bapt same day
Richard likely buried 1777 as below
FRANCIS 19 Apr 1778
There is a THOMAS/SARAH H... baptising children same Church
Mercy 1755
Thomas 1757
Mary 1759
Sarah 1760
Jane 1763
Other burials there are;
Mace 1731 Daug of Thomas/Mace
Mercy 1755 Widow of Thomas
Ann 1770
Richard 1777 infant
Thomas 1780 no extra info
Now there is a Burial Charlwood for a SARAH H 15 Mar 1792 age 38 (1754)
So too young to be the Mother of children above with Thomas.
I was hoping to link Thomas to John but I have no access to Henfield bapts.
Trish :)
Annabella may have married William GARARD 18 Apr 1797 Walton on the Hill, Surrey
-
Ooohhh ... thank you Trish. Those are all useful additions to the melting pot.
Are Richard, Annabella and Francis baptised in Horne or Charlwood?
(This family has a strong tendency to reuse less common names from previous generations ... so knowing that Annabella and Francis "belong" in the family may help to make a judgment call somewhere along the line ... )
-
Yes baptised Horne.
On www.freereg.org.uk
Trish :)
-
Good Morning
Well,Trish you've done all the hard work.
Good going.
But if we add a few details I reckon we can solve this.
I think Thomas and Sarah are the son and daughter in law of Thomas and Mercy.
Thomas junior married Sarah Brown 12.4.1755 at Burstow by licence.He was from Horne and she was from Burstow. Wit William Hugget and Maryann Frances don't help but there is no widower for Thomas.
Thomas junior buried Burstow 11.1.1778 and Thomas Senior at Horne 15.12.1780.
The Latter leaves a PPC Will .(it does say of Burstow which is a bit confusing).
He mentions the children of his late son Thomas and late daughter Elizabeth get £15 each.Children of his son John get a guinea.
Then his estate at the Manor of Cuckfield? ? Sussex to grandson Thomas eldest son of his son Thomas.
I checked the PCC Wills for John 1810 and Helen 1813 ,lovely but no more details for the previous generation.
Looking for a marriage of Thomas,Elizabeth and John's parents--- Thomas and Mercy the only thing I can see is on Boyds marriage index.
Thomas Holcom and Mercy Lang 1720 Chichester Archdeanary marriage licences.
They seem to have baptised their children at West Tarring and Sompting Sussex
Thomas 20.12.1721 Sompting
Elizabeth 24.2.1723 Sompting
Mercy 24.2.1726 West Tarring
Mary 8.2.1728 West Tarring
John 31.1.1729 West Tarring
In 1731 they move over to Horne,and you've got their daughter Mercy buried 31.12.1731 as Trish said.
I'm guessing the move was prompted by Thomas Senior's father's death in1731.
Thomas bapt 5.2.1691/2 s of Thomas and Elizabeth Holcomb at Cuckfield would fit.
The older Thomas buried 20.10.1731 at Slaugham .
His Probate is at East Sussex Wills.I can see the Inventry £340 10 0d but can't find thw Will.
The couple married 18.12.1687 Thomas Holcomb yeoman of Cuckfield and Elizabeth Butenshaw by licence. Surieties T.H and John Holcomb.
Children I can see Cuckfield
John 22.4.1690,Thomas 5.2.1691/2 ,child 30.5.1698 ,Timothy 24.3.1700 and Jane 20.9.1701.
There are supposed to be photos of the Graves at Burstow on A billion graves but I can't get the site to some up.
I'm pretty sure Thomas and Mercy are John's parents and the baptism fits nicely .Not 100% on Cuckfield stuff but the Thomas Holcomb 1780 PCC Will is difficult to read for the parish he has land in .
Fingers crossed.
Good Work Trish!
Ciderdrinker
-
Hi
Just Found that East Sussex Will for Thomas Holcomb 1731.
Son John gets lease of Seaplace Farm.
Daughters Elizabeth and Jane get £250 a piece.
Son Thomas £100
Wife Elizabeth £10 and household goods.
grandson Thomas son of Thomas £5 and other grandchildren 1 guinea.
Son Walter The Delves in Manor of Cuckfield with which to pay Thomas's debts.
The remainder to Thomas ,Elizabeth and Jane.
Made 13.5.1730.
Some of them get a lot more than others.
Walter still hadn't paid out the legacies to his two sisters by the time of his own death 1768.
His Will is again at East Sussex Wills and names lots of nephews and nieces and brother John.
Sister Elizabeth also leaves a Will 1769 of Lewes ,East Sussex.
So plenty to look out and try to match up.
Ciderdrinker
-
Hi Ciderdrinker.
I may have started but you have definitely done all the hard work.
Excellent research.
It has been frustrating as tried to get back on here but couldn't until I tried tonight when I got home..
Trish :)
Glad I could help a little jbml!
-
No It was you that gave me the idea.
Ciderdrinker
-
Oh wow, Trish and Cider drinker ... this is MAGNIFICENT. Thank you so much. I always knew there was a bit of money in this family.
Now all I need to do is check this against my notes and correct anything that wasn't correct, incorporate all the new material, and ... phew! It might take a while!
I'm still trying to see where Iron Pear Tree Water from Holcomb's New Well fits into all this. It HAS to be this Holcomb family ...
-
All I can see it that Holcomb and Baldwin sold it in London.
The Product: Known as the "Iron Pear-Tree water," it was a natural mineral water sourced near Godstone, Surrey, and packaged in specialized stoneware bottles around 1740–1750.
I am sure you know all that.
They were Merchants and in the Book business.
This was interesting;
The association between Holcomb and 18th-century mercantile trade is best known through the work of contemporary historian Julie L. Holcomb
Mercantile Boycotts: Her research meticulously documents how 18th-century Quaker merchants and consumer activists organized boycotts against slave-labor goods—specifically targeting products like sugar and cotton—to fight the transatlantic slave trade
-
Ooohhh ... I knew everything up to when you said you were sure I knew all that ... and nothing that came after.
My Holcombs were in Nutfield (the next parish to Godstone) and Godstone, so I am sure it must be the Iron Pear Tree Water family. But I have not yet been able to prove it. It is tantalising, to say the least!
-
This was interesting;
The association between Holcomb and 18th-century mercantile trade is best known through the work of contemporary historian Julie L. Holcomb
Mercantile Boycotts: Her research meticulously documents how 18th-century Quaker merchants and consumer activists organized boycotts against slave-labor goods—specifically targeting products like sugar and cotton—to fight the transatlantic slave trade
Oh blimey ... she ain't gonna like what my great x4 grandfather did, then! After my branch of the family moved away from Surrey they ended up in Chippenham, near Newmarket, where my great x4 grandfather Anthony Holcomb was for 60 odd years the Bailiff of the Chippenham Hall estate.
Chippenham Hall was the English seat of the Tharp family.
And the Tharps were wealthy Jamaican sugar planters.
The Tharp who held it when my Holcombs arrived there inherited in 1809. His inheritance was valued at £500 000. (And no, that's not been "adjusted to modern-day values" ... that's 1809 values!) A lot of that has to be slaves ...
-
She probably would not like that :)
Family history it what it is and we can not be responsible for things hundreds of years age.
I had a quick look for Julie and shes based in the US.
-
I had a quick look for Julie and shes based in the US.
Indeed. I've just sent her an e-mail. Let's see if she replies :-D
-
Good work was going to suggest that.
I contacted many years ago the biographer of Iris Murdoch.
The presumption was she was very Irish.
They really hadn't researched her Grandmothers line well as she was my Grandmothers Sister and born in New Zealand to English Parents
Louisa Shaw 1871 married Wills John Hughes Murdoch 1888 in NZ
( I have the M/C)
My Grandmother Martha Shaw was her Sister
Trish :)
-
OK Trish and ciderdrinker ... I've finished chasing the Holmans around Surrey. Great fun. Took me to the Wheatly family of Guildford, two generations of whom were parish clerk at St Mary's in the 16th century (the local historian in the congregation of St Mary's wasn't aware of that one ... )
Also found one of them who was a farmer at Ewhurst in the 17th century. Can't find out which farm he had ... but would be highly entertaining if it turns out to be Woolpit Farm. My paternal grandfather bought that farm in 1951 (the Surrey History Centre has a set of the auction particulars for that sale). What a coincidence it would be if my maternal forebears owned that very same farm 300 years previously ...
ciderdrinker's pedigree looks bang on to me and I need to double check the references and get it written up now. Shouldn't take too long given that they're so clearly presented. But it does now change my original question into "so who the devil were Benjamin and Ann Holcomb?" ... and, more importantly, how (if at all) do they fit in with MY lot? After noting down that wonderful memorial inscription on my field trip to Godstone a few years back (QUITE a few years back ... I haven't been on any FH field trips since Covid ... ) it would be a pity to find that they don't "belong" to my family at all. But if they don't, they don't ...
Looking at the Thomas Holcomb / Elizabeth Burtenshaw marriage licence ... do we think the surety John Holcomb was Thomas Holcomb's father? He ought to be, oughtn't he?
-
I might leave this one to ciderdrinker and others as my eyesight not great and cant read old documents like I used to :)
-
Hi
Yes it would be nice to think The John Holcombe on Thomas and Elizabeth's marriage licence was his father.It would fit nicely with them naming their eldest son John but I think he was Thomas's brother.
There doesn't seem to be a John having children around the right date.
I'd go for Thomas and Elizabeth Holcombe of Staplefield Cuckfield.
Thomas makes a Will(East Sussex Wills 20 Dec 1660 as Thomas Holrombe)
He names his wife Elizabeth ,sons Thomas .Timothy,John and daughter Elizabeth.
Baptisms I can see at Cuckfield
Elizabeth 9.2.1653
John 16.4.1656
Timothy 24.12.1657
There is a possible christening at Slaugham for Thomas 21.3.1659.But obviously you usually call the eldest son after yourself.
So Thomas could be born 1650 at his mother's parish which is where presumably the couple got married.I can't spot a wedding.
Nor can I see Thomas's burial either as Holcombe or as Ansite.
There are lots of Holcombe alias Ansties in the parish which complicates things.
You might also like to look at this
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/7911d11c-80e3-4f3d-af21-1224cf92c4ea
So a connection between the Burtonshaws and Holcombes on 1675.
Looking at Burtonshaw Wills it is Elizabeth's family but not sure if Thomas is her father.
There is a Francis Holcombe bapt 12.12.1643 s of Thomas and Dorothy Holcombe at Cuckfield.
Perhaps an older half brother from a first wife.
This would explain Thomas's early death.
It looks like Francis Ansty or Holcombe married Susan Vincent 18.11.1671.
He leaves another East Sussex Will 1681 -wife Susan
Children Anne and John.Brother in law John Vincent.
It all gets very complicated once you get back to the era of Holcombe/Ansty
I'm at the Library now.I'll try and give Ben and Ann ago tomorrow.
Ciderdrinker
-
I'll need to double check this one, cd, but actually I think it was the practice in the Holcombs NOT to name the first son after themselves; the one named after the father usually comes further down the sequence.
I'm stumbling around some of the maternal lines right now, but will come back and look at what you've got here soon and try to see how it all fits in. They're an interesting lot ...