Help appreciated: untangling the Holcombs of Godstone

[trish1120]

I might leave this one to ciderdrinker and others as my eyesight not great and cant read old documents like I used to

[ciderdrinker]

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

[jbml]

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 ...