RootsChat.Com

There isn’t actually a black frame round the photo it is just the way it’s photographed. The glass front of the locket is gone and the photo sits a good 3mm down and the inside ring is a grey base metal colour which appears darker than the more reflective gold.
So they could still be one and the same.

Is it possible to date locket man with what little clothing one can see?

My gut feeling is that it is John Miles as, despite living in Sussex, my great grandmother was in Worcestershire in 1903 when she had her third child so obviously was still close to her parents and likely to have kept mementoes of them.

I don’t have this photo, I just managed to photograph it at the time. It was part of a treasure trove of photos, oil portraits, pencil portraits and family papers that were found when clearing my uncle’s house in 2008.
The above came from the homes of my great grandparents on both my grandmother’s and grandfather’s sides.
The unknown gardener was a very large print sealed in a frame and hung on a wall so nothing to see on the back as far as I can remember. I’ve been able to identify many of the photos (all unlabelled/undated) but this eludes me.

I also have an unidentified photo in a tiny broken locket which I kept. I think it may be of the same person as a young man. It is in poor condition but can anyone see his clothing well enough to date him and tell one way or the other.

Thanks, I thought it must be Wickhambrook.

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.

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.