Henry Brockett of Lanchester - The Broket Archive

Henry and Ann Brockett
of Lanchester and Durham St Oswald parishes
1720-92 and 1724-94

You’ll be surprised at the many intriguing features of this Brockett family and clan. To give just two examples:

  • When John Brockett, the youngest son of this rural tenant-farming couple, was about 35 he was recorded as a Shoemaker in the small rural settlement of Witton Gilbert, west of Durham City. Yet within a decade he had become Prothonotary—senior clerk—in the Court in the flourishing port of Gateshead, c 12 miles north, and was using the title ‘Gentleman’. Then over the next 70 years members of his family spread around the world—to Havana, China, Jamaica and New Zealand, see the separate page.
  • John actually started life in 1764 as John Brock—son of Henry and Ann Brock—and is an exception to the rule that the surname Broket did not evolve from Brok, see the discussion on a separate page. This also proves—without the need for DNA evidence—that not all Broket clans are related.

A headstone in Durham St Oswald parish churchyard, facing on to the highway into town, reads:

“In Memory of HENRY BROCKETT who died June 16th 1792 Aged 72
Also ANN BROCKETT his Wife who died Novr 30th 1794 Aged 70 Years
And to William Son of the above who died on the 13th of Sepr 1821 Aged 77 Years.1

The Will of Henery Brocket of Croxdale Yeoman, written 14 June 1792,2 +Read more

and the Will of William Brockett of Redhouse Gentleman, written 5 Jul 1821,4 +Read more + provide the following details of the family:7

Family of Henry BROCKETT of Lanchester

Research history: +Read more

Name change

Combine the details in the tree above with an outline of the parish records of the wider family and the evolution of the name change becomes apparent. The following descendants of Heugh and Emme Brock of High Longly, both buried in Lanchester churchyard in 1710, are recorded:+Read more

The burials of Heugh and Emmy Brock of High Longly [Langley] in 1710, were the first Brock records in Lanchester All Saints parish register—which dates from c 1560. And subsequent and associated records are few enough to suggest that at the beginning of the 18th C there was a single Brock family there, and that between 1742-70 there were three housesholds—each a son of the earlier family. There can be no doubt, for example, that Heugh and Emmy were the parents of William of Langley East House and Broomhouse, married 1716, recorded 4 times as Brock and 4 as Brooke, and buried 1737. Similarly, the three families recorded in the 1740s were doubtless married children of that William, buried 1737. No other possible parents were there. As suddenly as Brocks appeared in Lanchester, they disappeared some 62 years later. After 1772 records of only 3 further Brocks in Lanchester have been found, between 1879-93, but they will have been unrelated incomers. Indeed, apart from this small clan, no records of Brocks have been found in County Durham records as a whole before the late 19th C.9 So where might the single Brock family of Heugh and Emme Brock have come from? See below.

Somewhat similarly to the Brothwoods/Brockets of Bedfordshire, the alias wasn’t adopted as a single event, but coexisted with the original surname for some time:

  • Henry’s father William was recorded in Lanchester 8 times as Brock, 3 as Brooke, the latter probably just a variant written by the parish clerk. He was buried in 1737 as William Brock, when Henry was aged about 16.
  • Although Henry was recorded under the name/alias Brocket at his marriage in 1742 and burial in 1792, he was recorded as Brock as well in the 1740s, 1764 and at least until 1783, as shown in the Witton Gilbert auction notice below.
  • Three of his five children were baptised as Brocks in Lanchester parish, including the last one, John, in 1764.
  • Similarly, his younger daughter Deborah, although baptised as a Brocket, married as a Brock 24 years later in 1772.

Lanchester and Durham St Oswald parishes

The adjacent parishes of Lanchester and Durham St Oswald were both large and contained a number of townships and rural areas at some considerable distance from the actual village of Lanchester and city of Durham. And it was in rural areas of both parishes to the NW, W and SW of Durham City that Henry and his relatives lived and farmed, mostly in the parish of Lanchester, in whose church he and Ann married in 1742 and baptised their children over the next 22 years.

Of Lanchester parish, Surtees said, “The extensive Parish of Lanchester is bounded on the North by the Parish of Ryton and by the Chapelry of Tanfield; by the Parish of Chester-le-Street on the East; by Witton Gilbert, and by St. Oswalds, in the suburbs of Durham, on the South-East ; by Brancepath and Wolsingham on the South and South-West; and by the Parishes of Stanhope and Muggleswick, and by the Darwent (forming the boundary of Northumberland) on the West and North-West. … The Parish includes eighteen Constableries: 1. Lanchester; 2. Greencroft; 3. Holm-side; 4. Langley; 5. Burnop and Hamsteels; 6. Eshe; 7. Hedleyhope; 8. Cornsey; 9. Butsfield and Satley; 10. Heleyfield; 11. Kyo, which includes Bursblades; 12. Iveston with Crook; 13. Collierly; 14. Billingside; 15. Medomsley; 16. Benfield-side; 17. Consett and Knitsley; 18. Ebchester.”10

Of St Oswald’s parish, Whellan said, “This parish includes the borough and barony of Elvet, and the township of Broom, and formerly comprised seven constableries, viz. :—1 The borough of Elvet; 2, the barony of Elvet; 3, Shincliffe, which comprised Croxdale and Butterby; 4, Crossgate; 5. Framwellgate; 6. Broom; and 7. Witton Gilbert“.11 And Page said, “The ancient parish of St. Oswald lay around three sides of the city of Durham and occupied all the right bank of the Wear… It thus included the modern districts of Finchale, Framwellgate and Framwellgate Moor, Broom, Neville’s Cross, Crossgate, Old and New Elvet, Old Durham, Shincliffe, Croxdale and Sunderland Bridge“.12

During the lifetimes of Henry and his children—and indeed of his parents and grandparents—the 3rd to 5th generations of an extended Durham City Broket clan were living in the City itself and had originally also been parishioners of Durham St Oswald, see the separate page. However, despite Henry, Ann and William’s burials in Durham St Oswald churchyard there can be no confusion between their clan and this Durham City clan for the following reasons:

  1. Apart from the names William and John, those of the other males of Henry and Ann’s clan—Hugh, Henry, Anthony, Robert and Stephen—didn’t occur in the Durham City clan, and the last known William and John of that clan died in 1754 and 1757 respectively.
  2. The single Durham City record found of a William there later—“William Brockett, yeoman, of the city of Durham” in 1798—concerned his lease of Red House. So he was without doubt Henry’s son William 1745-1821. But although this shows he resided in the City for a period, he was the only one of Henry and Ann’s clan recorded doing so and he had no children of his own.
  3. Finally there was the name change from Brock. No record of a Brock has been found in any Durham City parish before the 20th C, nor has any Will or Administration of any Brock been found in the entire Durham Diocese before 1858, apart from that of William, Henry’s father in Lanchester parish in 1737. Before 1858 Durham Diocese included the large territory of Tyne and Wear, County Durham, most of Northumberland, 2 Yorkshire parishes and a Cumberland one.13

The same applies with other Co Durham Broket families and clans, like the one in Aycliffe c 1735-1817, as little as 9 miles S of Croxdale on the main highway, see the separate page, the one down in Headlam in the Tees valley (an offshoot of the Durhan City clan), and the one in Sunderland c 16 miles to the NE of Croxdale, see the separate page.

Names of places and parishes can change, as can their extent, but following are the places in the vicinity of Durham City recorded for Henry and Ann’s clan, with some discussion of where the actual properties might have been:+Read more

Summary: Henry’s father William was recorded at Broomhouse 1721-2, Langley East House 1731, and finally at Broomhouse again 1737. Broomhouse appears to have been in Langley township, so it’s possible that Broomhouse and Langley East House were the same property. Similarly, Henry himself—in addition to his baptism in 1721—was recorded at Broom-house 1743-5, and barely one year later at Langley Lane 1746-8. So again, it’s possible that Broom-house and Langley Lane referred to the same property. Moreover, the same may apply to Henry’s grandparents’ home in 1710 called High Longley [Langley]. If so, Henry would have grown up in his grandparents’ and parents’ home, and carried on living there with Ann 1743-8 during the time of the baptisms of their children Hugh, William, Mary and Deborah and probably longer. By the time of the baptism of their last child John, 16 years later, Henry and Ann were at Stobbilee, and their final residence was in Croxdale. Apart from Croxdale, which was in Durham St Oswald parish, they appear to have lived their lives in Lanchester parish.

Manorial court records may show to what level Henry, his father, brothers and children, owned the land they farmed, but judging from houses possibly occupied by Henry’s sons and the properties that were still owned by the next-generation Gateshead family, Henry or at least his son William were probably Yeomen of substantial means. Henry’s father’s estate in 1738, however, had been estimated at only £50—half the penalty for not administering it.25

Local parish records

Following are transcriptions in date order of all the relevant register entries found, firstly in Lanchester parish and then in nearby parishes.26 Surname spellings are highlighted in bold, and square brackets contain comments not in the actual records.

1. Lanchester parish records:+Read more

2. Other local parish records:+Read more

Wensley parish, Yorkshire

It so happens that up to 1695—fifteen years before the burials of Heugh and Emme Brock in Lanchester churchyard—a couple with the same names were recorded having a family in the village of Preston [under Scar] in Wensley parish at the head of the Yorkshire dale of that name, c 50 miles south of High Langley, Co Durham. Neither Hugh nor Emme were common names at that time and of course as a couple even less so. So to be living at the same time within a a couple of days’ journey from each other is probably beyond coincidence. It becomes definitely so when the same names of the other Brock burials in Lanchester in the decade that Heugh and Emme Brock died are to be found as children of theirs baptised in Wensley, namely:

Margaret Brock married Lanchester 1712. Margarett Brock baptised Wensley 1684.
William Brock married Lanchester 1716. William Brock baptised Wensley 1685.
Elizabeth Brock buried Lanchester 1716. Elizabeth Brock baptised Wensley 1687.
Ann Brock married Lanchester 1719. Anne Brock baptised Wensley 1695.

Here are the Wensley parish records of Brocks found:75

Hugo Brocke et Elizabetha Littlefaire” were married 13 Feb 1624/5.76Hugh Brock” was buried 9 Feb 1656/7.77Elizabeth Brock” was buried 5 Mar 1656/7.78 Children:

1. “Elizabetha Brocke filia Hugonis Brocke” was baptised 25 Mar 1626.79Elizabeth Fillia Hugh Brocke” was buried 25 Oct 1655.80
2. “Gulielmus Brocke filius Hugonis Brock” was baptised 7 Nov 1630.81Willam’ Brocke et Margerere Todd” were married 5 Jan 1655/6.82  “Margerere vxor William Brock” was buried 5 Sep 1656.83William Brock and Dorothy Chapman” were married 12 Nov 1656.84 No burial record of either William or Dorothy in Wesley or the vicinity has been found. Children:

1. “Hugh Fillius William Brock” was baptised 31 Oct 1658.85 Hugh Brock & Emme Robinson both of Preston 7ber pmo'” [i.e. 1 Sep] 1683 were married.86 That they were from Preston is recorded in each entry in the Wensley parish register hereafter. Both were buried in Lanchester 1710, see above.

1. “Margarett Filia Hugh Brock June the 8 Preston” was baptised 1684.87 Married in Lanchester 1712, see above.
2. “William filius Hugh Brock December the 13 p[reston]” 1685 was baptised.88 Married Jane Proud in Lanchester 1716, and both buried there 1737 and 1760, see above. Parents of Henry b 1720 d 1792.
3. “Elizabeth filia Hugh Brock De preston” was baptised 16 Oct 1687.89 Buried in Lanchester 1716, see above.
4. “Hugh the son of Hugh Brock of preston” was baptised 19 Apr 1691.90 No further record found.
5. “Dorothy the Daughter of Hugh Brock of preston” was baptised 19 Aug 1694.91Dorothy the Daughter of Hugh Brock of Preston” was buried 22 Aug 1694.92
6. “Anne Daughter of Hugh Brock of Preston bapt:d August 25th” 1695.93 Married in Lanchester 1719, see above.

2. “James Fillius William Brocke” was baptised 1 Jan 1664/5.94 No further record found.
3. “Jacobus filius Will’m Brock” was baptised 15 Nov 1667.95 No further record found.

3. Robartus Brocke filius Hugonis Brock” was baptised 31 Mar 1633.96
4. “Ann Fillia How brocke” was baptised 17 Sep 1637.97

Between 1695 and 1710 Hugh, Emme, Margaret, William, Elizabeth and Ann removed to the parish of Lanchester, c 50 miles north.

This therefore was the male-line ancestry of William Henry Brockett, Mayor of Gateshead, the amateur genealogist and publisher of the fine 1860 Gateshead pedigree, see the separate page:

The male-line ancestry of William Henry Brockett of Gateshead

Page Last Updated: March 10, 2021

Footnotes

For full bibliographical details please see the sections Publications or Glossary.

Expand

[1] William's details are in slightly different lettering, so probably added later. For a photo see Findagrave Memorial ID 158746183.

[2] DUASC DPRI/1/1794/B6/1---the original Will with Henery's mark signing it---transcription by AAB 10 Feb 2021. DUASC is Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections. There is also a registered copy of the Will: DPRI/2/31 p158-159.

[3] The DUASC catalogue transcribes this 'Ontherim'. In the original Will it is clearly 'Ontherin'.

[4] Proved 17 Sep 1821, DUASC DPRI/1/1821/B23/1-2 (original Will), DPRI/2/33 p 327 (registered copy) transcription by AAB from the original 10 Feb 2021. Signature reproduced from the original Will courtesy of DUASC.

[5] Land Tax Returns for Chester Ward West 1759-1830, Durham Co Record Office Q/D/L 25-35.

[6] Land Tax Returns for Chester Ward Middle 1759-1830, Durham Co Record Office Q/D/L 17, 18, 19.

[7] Henry's Will spelt the name with one 't', William's with two. For brevity the one 't' spelling is used here.

[8] DUASC NDFHS Reference 8960319; NDFHS is Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[9] Online catalogues of both Durham County Record Office and Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections searched 22 Feb 2021.

[10] 1828, at British History Online, tinyurl.com/47l9m9vz, accessed 23 February 2021. Bold font mine.

[11] 1856 p 266. Bold font mine.

[12] 1928, at British History Online, tinyurl.com/4jkh3a2p, accessed 23 February 2021. Bold font mine.

[13] Durham Probate Records database information at tinyurl.com/5zt52edu, accessed 24 Feb 2021.

[14] tinyurl.com/44g35hyx, accessed 22 Feb 2021.

[15] British Listed Buildings Online: tinyurl.com/1ea8bksk, accessed 14 Feb 2021.

[16] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/248 p 2, image accessed from FMP 15 Feb 2021.

[17] 1856 p 905.

[18] Ushaw College Administration: Estate Records now part of Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections, ref: GB-0298-UC/AC7/15/3. Many thanks to Richard Brockett for this reference, 15 Jan 2021.

[19] Grid Reference: NZ22854326 with an image of the farm house by Robert Graham at tinyurl.com/ynt3xxyn, accessed 24 Feb 2021.

[20] Under the 'History' tab at witton-gilbert.org.uk/, accessed 25 Feb 2021.

[21] Images of all three can be found on the internet as of 25 Feb 2021.

[22] tinyurl.com/n11yfrie, accessed 22 Feb 2021. See also under the 'History' tab at witton-gilbert.org.uk/, accessed 25 Feb 2021.

[23] The_Newcastle_Weekly_Courant 15 Nov 1783_p_2.

[24] DUASC DPR/I/1/1827/B22/1-2.

[25] With thanks to Durham University Library Archivist Francis Gotto for this explanation, 23 Feb 2021.

[26] As of 11 Feb 2021.

[27] Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image; NBI.

[28] Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image; NBI.

[29] Boyd's marriage index, 1538-1850, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[30] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[31] Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image; NBI.

[32] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[33] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[34] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image. The year began 26 Mar.

[35] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham County Record Office, consulted 2002. Also IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[36] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham Co Record Office, consulted 2002; Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[37] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[38] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[39] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[40] Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image; NBI.

[41] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[42] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham Co Record Office, consulted 2002. 25 Jul in NBI transcription 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[43] DUASC DPRI/3/1737/B234; image of original accessed on FamilySearch 23 Feb 2021.

[44] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Book C f19 (via Index Book #131) of the Lanchester parish register at Durham County Record Office, consulted 2002. Also IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[45] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[46] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham Co Record Office, consulted 2002. Also IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[47] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[48] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Book C f27 (via Index Book #131) of the Lanchester parish register at Durham County Record Office, consulted 2002. Also IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[49] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[50] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham Co Record Office, consulted 2002. Also IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[51] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[52] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Book D f21 (via Index Book #131) of the Lanchester parish register at Durham County Record Office, consulted 2002 (Book #131 had mistakenly transcribed the entry as 'Deborah Brocket daughter of Anthony' perhaps by dittography with the 24 Apr entry). Also IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[53] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[54] Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham Co Record Office 2002, consulted 2002; Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image; NBI.

[55] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[56] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[57] NBI, accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[58] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[59] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[60] Bishop's Transcripts 1773, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/164/3. The previous page in the Bishop's Transcripts is entitled 'Baptisms in 1764'. Image accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, snip reproduced courtesy of DULASC. Also, Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham Co Record Office, consulted 2002.

[61] Bishop's Transcripts 1773, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/164/23. Image accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021.

[62] Bishop's Transcripts 1773, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/164/40. Image accessed from FMP 10 Feb 2021, snip reproduced courtesy of DULASC. Also, Microfilm M42/687 of Register Books C and D of the Lanchester parish register at Durham Co Record Office, consulted 2002.

[63] Northumberland & Durham Family History Society transcription, accessed from FMP 14 Feb 2021, no image.

[64] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/248, image accessed from FMP 15 Feb 2021.

[65] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/248 p 2, image accessed from FMP 15 Feb 2021.

[66] IGI transcription accessed 10 Feb 2021, no image.

[67] IGI transcription accessed 16 Feb 2021, no image.

[68] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/87/11, image accessed from FMP 15 Feb 2021.

[69] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/277/5, image accessed from FMP 16 Feb 2021.

[70] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/277, image accessed from FMP 16 Feb 2021.

[71] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/146, image accessed from FMP 15 Feb 2021.

[72] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/248, image accessed from FMP 15 Feb 2021.

[73] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/87/272 p 48, image accessed from FMP 15 Feb 2021.

[74] Bishop's Transcripts, DUASC DDR/EA/PBT/2/87/302 p 83. Image accessed from FMP 14 Feb 2021. Note the headstone has 13 Sep.

[75] Images of the actual register---North Yorkshire County Record Office PR/WEN 1/1 ( pages in footnotes after each entry)---werw accessed for all the following entries 18 Feb 2021 from FMP.

[76] p 190.

[77] p 208.

[78] p 208.

[79] p 48.

[80] p 207.

[81] p 48.

[82] p 207.

[83] p 208.

[84] p 209.

[85] p 68.

[86] p 234.

[87] p 94.

[88] p 97.

[89] p 98.

[90] p 101.

[91] p 103.

[92] p 243.

[93] p 104.

[94] p 74.

[95] p 81.

[96] p 51.

[97] p 53.

male enhancement gummies at walmart do male enhancement pills work vigorprimex male enhancement gummies cbd male enhancement gummies near me official website aizen power dr oz male enhancement ingredients top 10 best cbd gummies for erectile dysfunction 2024 ed gummies biolife cbd gummies male enhancement upgrade 2024 libido virility support formula full body health male enhancement gummies official website aizen power walmart male enhancement ingredients vigrx x ed best cbd gummies for erectile dysfunction kelly clarkson journey to lose weight naturally cbd gummies for ed top cbd gummies get it now offer 2024 yuppie cbd gummies reviews top 10 best cbd gummies for erectile dysfunction 2024 ed gummies kelly clarkson weight loss scam features keto gummies with fake reviews here s how it works