Edward of Letchworth Esq b 1490/1
d 1559
Edward grew up accustomed to deference from
the people of the parish. On public occasions he sat with
his parents and brother and sisters in the Brockett Chapel
in Wheathampstead Church and then processed out while those
in the nave remained standing. He was the 2nd son
of the local Lord of the Manor, who was Sheriff of
Herts and Essex when Edward was 17.
In 1511 Edward was admitted to Lincoln's
Inn in London. His elder brother John
(who had gone to the Middle Temple in 1509) died before his
father in 1526. His father
died 1532 when Edward was 42 and nephew John, the heir to
the estate, c 22. John and Edward were the leading
members of the dynasty for the next 26 years.
Edward owned considerable property in Hertfordshire, especially
in Hitchin Parish and Hundred, his mother's territory. His
father bequeathed him Almeshobury for term
of his life, but his main residences were Letchworth
and from 1537/8 Bradfield (or Broadfield).
He was twice Sheriff of Herts and Essex, twice MP for Herts
and was the young Sir John's elder colleague on many County
commissions. Money he borrowed from cousins William and John
was not repaid by his death. His will was not proved till
25 years later.
Following is the entry on Edward in Bindoff
(1982 pp 498-9), reproduced by permission of the Trustees
of the History of
Parliament. A few internal links have been added plus
1 or 2 amplifications in square brackets.
|
BROCKET, Edward (1490/91-1558/69), of Broadfield and
Letchworth, Herts.
[MP for] HERTFORDSHIRE ?1542,1 1554 (Nov.)2
b. 1490/91, 2nd s. of John Brocket by Lucy,
da. of John Pulter of Hitchin. educ. ?L. Inn,
adm. 8 Feb. 1511. m. Margaret Mickleford, at
least 4s. 2da.3
J.p. Herts. 1521-?d., q. 1554, Beds. 1542;
escheator, Essex and Herts. 1534-5, 1541-2; commr. tenths
of spiritualities, Herts. 1535, relief 1550; sheriff,
Essex and Herts. 1547-8, 1554-5.4
There were several Edward Brockets alive in the 1550s,
but the one most likely to have sat in the Commons in
1554 and (conjecturally) in 1542 was the oldest of them,
a younger son of the sheriff of Essex and Hertfordshire
in 1507-8, and the uncle of (Sir) John
Brocket. Probably the Edward Brocket admitted to Lincoln's
Inn in 1511, he next appears as a party to a fine of
Hertfordshire lands in 1518 and he became a justice
of the peace three years later. In 1536 he was one of
those commissioned to examine witnesses to alleged seditious
talk by a St. Albans priest, and later in the same year,
at the time of the northern rebellion, he was among
the leading country gentlemen proposed as the keepers
of good order in Hertfordshire. His age and experience
make it possible that he was the 'Brokett' who sat for
Hertfordshire in 1542, for his nephew, later Sir John,
was about 30 years of age at the time and had but recently
begun his career of service in the county. Brocket was
one of those called on in 1544 to raise troops for the
French war, but there is no evidence that he himself
went to France. Rated at £40 for the subsidy in 1545,
he was thus probably one of the wealthiest men in the
half-hundred of Hitchin.5
Brocket was the first sheriff of Essex and Hertfordshire
pricked in Edward VI's reign. Six months later, in June
1548, he was licensed to exercise the office during
the King's pleasure; a similar dispensation, with permission
to act by deputy, is probably misdated 1549 and in fact
refers to the same licence. Nothing is known of his
role during the crisis of 1553, but he was re-appointed
to the commission of the peace by Queen Mary and became
one of the quorum on the bench for Hertfordshire. Returned
as knight of the shire to the Parliament of November
1554 he became sheriff again two days after the session
had begun; it was during this second term that he officiated
at the burning of the Protestant George Tankerfield.
Foxe says nothing to suggest that
Brocket was a Catholic zealot, and the disappearance
of his name from the Elizabethan commission for Hertfordshire
may have been consequent on his death, the date of which
is not known [1559]. He either found difficulty in,
or objected to, contributing to the loan of 1557, for
in November 1557 the Hertfordshire commissioners ordered
him to appear before the Privy Council, which he did
'and desired to have it so recorded'.6
Brocket made his will on 31 July
1558, but no inquisition post mortem has been found,
and the will was not proved until 1584. Yet he must
have died before July 1569, when his eldest son Edward,
administrator of his father's estate, obtained a pardon
of outlawry. Edward had not been named an executor of
his father's will but had obtained letters of administration
as next-of-kin: why this course was adopted is not clear,
but it was presumably agreed upon between the testator's
sons. The executors of a relative,
William Brocket,
were to sue Edward Brocket the younger in Chancery for
an alleged debt of £120 in connexion with some land
in Kent owned by his father; the pleadings recite the
will and the younger Edward's agreement with his brothers
to pay the debt claimed, so that Edward had probably
agreed to pay it in return for authority to administer
the will. He finally took out probate of his father's
will in October 1584. The will left a life interest
in certain lands and goods to the widow and divided
the testator's principal lands in Hertfordshire and
Kent between his four sons in tail; the residue of the
goods and chattels went to two daughters.7
|
| 1.
Only the surname remains on a damaged return, C219/18B/37.
2. Huntington Lib. Hastings mss Parl.
pprs. 3. Aged 56 in January 1547, C24/23.
Clutterbuck, Herts. ii. 360; Vis. Essex
(Harl. Soc. xiii), 30. 4. LP Hen.
VIII, iii, iv, viii, xiii, xvii, xx; CPR,
1553, pp. 316, 354; 1553-4, p. 20. 5.
LP Hen. VIII, xi, xix; Herts. Gen. and Antiq.
i. 331. 6. CPR, 1549-5I, p.
51; 1553, p. 404; Foxe, Acts and Mons. vii. 345;
APC, vi. 196. 7. CPR,
1566-9, p. 420; PCC 33 Watson; C3/132/103. D.F.C. |
Comments on Bindoff's biography
1. The statement in footnote 3 that Edward was aged
56 in Jan 1547 appears to be precise rather than
approximate (PRO C24/23 l 28), so his birth can be placed
in 1490 or 91.
2. A more precise death date
than 1558/69 is revealed from PRO C3/132/103.
Edward was still alive 28 Oct 1559, the feast
of Simon & Jude (l 20), when the Executors required him
to pay £5 interest a year at Christmas until the debt
be paid, but had died before Christmas 1559,
when his son Edward entered into a bond to pay the £120
remaining.
3. Edward left Broadfield/Bradfield manor
in his will to son Edward.
He had acquired it in 1537/8 (Chauncy 1826 vol 1 p 144f: by
deeds of 20 Dec 1537 and 20 Oct 1538—drawing of it facing
p 144; VCH vol 3 p 210 cited Close, 30
Hen VIII, pt vi no 5).
4. Bindoff's statement that there were several Edward
Brockets alive in the 1550s is true, but only one
other than his own son was of age. There were:
- Edward of Willingale/Sawbridgeworth
Gent, aged c 32 in 1550.
- Edward's own son, aged
c 30 in 1550.
- Edward of Appleton,
Yorkshire, aged c 20 in 1550
- Edward s/o William I of Hitchin
Yeoman, aged 14 at most in 1550.
- Edward of Wheathampstead,
aged c 10 in 1550.
5. That the William Brocket, whose executors
sued Edward Brocket the younger for an alleged debt of £120,
was a relative was either seen by Bindoff
in the preamble to the pleadings before the parchments were
too damaged to decipher, or else assumed by him as an obvious
interpretation of the situation. Loans of that size to namesakes
would only have been made by kinsmen, especially as in this
case by oral agreement.
6. It was actually Edward's 2nd son William
who took out probate of his father's will
in October 1584.
7. That no IPM has been found is probably because none of
Edward's property on his death was held in chief.
Edward's wife was Margaret MICKELFIELD.
Berry and Clutterbuck mistakenly had Mickleford. This would
have been a strategic marriage by Edward's parents, but nothing
is yet known of Margaret's family or whether she was an heiress.
Only one Micklefield will was proved at the PCC 1383-1604,
that of John the younger, Baker, from Hadley, Suffolk in 1565.
Eldest sons of the nobility, and perhaps gentry, may have
married by the age of 21, but younger sons would normally
have been c 27 (Laslett 1983 p 82). This would date the marriage
c 1518.
None of their children were under 21 when Edward wrote his
will 31 July 1558, so the youngest would have been born before
1537. We know of 8 surviving children, so
an estimate of a two-year gap between each after 1518 would
suggest children born 1520, 1522, 1524, 1526, 1528, 1530,
1532, 1534. There were probably others that died young, so
the best estimation might be that the 3 or 4 eldest were born
c 1519-27, and the 3 or 4 youngest were born 1528-37 (30 July).
6 of the 8 were mentioned in Edward's will
(1-6 below), the other 2 being daughters mentioned as married
in Lucie's will and so
presumably already married by 1558:
- Edward
b c 1519-26, of Bradfield Esq/Gent who became embroiled
in legal problems, ending up an outlaw and then in prison
in the late 1560s (pardoned 1569). Died bef 1584.
- William
b c 1520-7, of Esyndon Gent, d 1609. Co-executor with brother
John of father's will.
- Lucie
unmarried in 1558.
- Thomas alive 1558,
when he was left a legacy from his father. He was probably
alive 1570, when sister Lucie
called brother William's son Thomas 'youngar', although
Lucie did not actually mention him. Perhaps he was the Thomas
Brockett who was discharged 10 Mar 1587 from Hertford gaol
by proclamation (Cockburn 1975 pp 66, 71). Perhaps therefore
he was the unnamed, but living, father of Lucie's nephew
Edward in 1570. No further record has been found.
- John
b bef 1537 d 1607, of Stowe and Impington (and formerly
Kimpton) Gent. Married Katherine ... but
had no surviving issue. Co-executor with brother William
of father's will.
- Ann unmarried in 1558.
- Millicent married George LEACH by 1558.
- ... married HAMILLDEN by 1558.
With a father the Sheriff of Herts and Essex 1547, 54, 55,
these children would have enjoyed a certain status in society.
On 26 Aug 1555 during his 2nd term as Sheriff, Edward officiated
at the burning of George Tankerfield at the stake
for his beliefs. England's official religion under
Queen Mary had reverted to Catholicism and many Protestants
were burned at the stake during her reign. As representatives
of the Crown Sheriffs up and down the country were presiding
at fires of execution and as Bindoff said, there is nothing
to suggest that Edward was a Catholic zealot.
Under the heading 'George Tankerfield a faithfull Martyr
and Witnesse of the Gospel, constantly suffering for the testimony
of the same', Foxe (1631 pp 394-7) described how Edward and
his under sheriff Edward Pulter—his 2nd cousin
once removed and Sheriff himself 1586 (Chauncy 1826 vol 1
p 48)—came from a wedding dinner to officiate at the
execution:
George
Tankerfield of London Cooke, borne in the Citie
of Yorke, about the age of 27. or 28. yeeres, was in King
Edwards daies a verie Papist, till the time Quene Marie
came in, and then, perceiuing the great crueltie vsed
of the Popes side, was brought into a misdoubt of their
doings, and began (as he sayd) in his heart to abhore
them… (p 395b )
IN primis, he was brought vnto St Albons by the
high Sheriffe of Hertfordshire, Master Edward Brocket
Esquire, and one Pulter of Hitchen, which was under Sheriffe.
Item, their Inne was the
Crosse=keyes, wheras there was great concourse of people
to see and heare the prisoner: among the which multitude,
some were sorrie to see so godly a man brought to be burned,
others praised God for his constancie and perseuerance
in the truth. Contrariwise, some there were which sayd,
it was pitie he did stand in such opinions: and others,
both old women and men cried against him; one called him
Heretick, and sayd it was pitie that he liued. But George
Tankerfield did speake vnto them so effectually out of
the word of God, in lamenting of their ignorance, and
protesting vnto them his vnspotted conscience, that God
did mollifie their hardned hearts, insomuch that some
of them departed out of the chamber with weeping eyes....
(p 396a-b)
And all this time the Sheriffes were at a certaine
Gentlemans house at dinner, not far from the
towne, thither also resorted Knights and many Gentlemen
out of the countrie, because his sonne was married that
day, and vntill they returned from dinner the prisoner
was left with his Hoste to be kept and looked vnto. And
George Tankerfield all that time was kindly and lovingly
intreated of his Hoste; and considering that his time
was short, his saying was, That although the day was neuer
so long, yet at the last it ringeth to euening song.
Item, about two
of the clock, when the Sheriffes were returned from dinner,
they brought George Tankerfield out of his Inne vnto the
place where he shoud suffer, which is called Romeland,
being a greene place nigh vnto the West end of the Abbey
Church: vnto the which when he was come he kneeled downe
by the stake that was set vp for him, and after he had
ended his prayers he arose, and with a joyfull faith he
sayd, that although he had a sharpe dinner, yet he hoped
to haue a ioyfull supper in heaven.
Item, while the fagots were
set about him, there came a Priest vnto him, and perswaded
him to beleeue on the sacrament of the altar, and he should
be saued. But George Tankerfield cried out vehemently,
and sayd; I defie the Whore of Babylon: site of that abominable
Idoll: Good people doe not beleeue him, good people doe
not beleeue him. And then the Maior of the Towne commanded
to set fre to the Hereticke, and sayd, If he had but one
loade of fagots in the whole world, hee would giue them
to burne him. There was a certaine Knight by, who went
vnto Tankerfield, and tooke him by the hand, and sayd,
Good brother, be strong in Christ, this hee spake softly;
and Tankerfield said, O Sir, I thanke you, I am so, I
thanke God. Then fire was set vnto him, and he
desired the Sheriffe and all the people that they would
pray for him; the most part did so. And so imbracing
the fire, he bathed himselfe in it, and calling on the
name of the Lord Jesus hee was quickly out of paine, &c.
After the martyrdome was
ended, and that he was fallen asleepe in the Lord, there
were some superstitious old women who did blasphemously
say, that the Diuell was so strong with him and all such
Heretickes as he was, that they could not feele anie paine
almost, nor yet be sorry for their sinnes. (p 396b ult
- 97a) |
1511 With his father,
elder brother and others, Edward purchased land in Bishops
Hatfield, Willian and Diggeswell from Richard and Elizabeth
Fyssher (PRO CP25/2/16).
1515 Chauncy (1826 vol 1 p 119) recorded
the gift of the manors of Letchworth and Weston by Sir Nicholas
Barrington in his will to 2 esquires, Edmund Brocket
Gent and others for 17 years. This must be an error
for Edward, whose sister Elizabeth was married
to Sir Nicholas Barrington. The first Edmund
Brocket was not born till c 1566.
1524 Edward witnessed his brother John's
will as 'gentleman'.
1531 Executor with Thomas Hutton and John
Peryent of the will of John Docwra of Temple Dinsley,
Herts, pr 12 Aug (PCC PROB 11/100; http://www.docwras.org.uk/doc-wills16.htm),
for which he received 5 marks the first year, 26s 8d each
year thereafter for life, costs, and a further 6s 8d for every
£20 of land purchased from the estate. Edward's aunt
had possibly married a Docwra. John's son or grandson was
overseer of the will of Edward's grandnephew Edward.
1532 On brother John's death Almshoe became
the property of John's son John, subject to the life interest
of Edward (VCH Herts iii p 26).
1535 The Prior
of the House of Our Blessed Lady and Convent of Hertford demised
to Edward for 41 years all its tithes of corn, grain, hay,
wood, wool and lamb arising within the parishes of Hitchin,
Minsden, Langley and Hippolits (Chauncy 1826 vol 2 p 183).
Edward's son Edward assigned the remainder of the lease in
1562 to John Esq (Sir John II).
1537-8 Purchased Broadfield/Bradfield manor
(VCH vol 3 1912 p 210: Close, 30 Hen VIII,
pt vi no 5).
1542, 44 MP for Herts
1545 Edward was one of the subsidy
Commissioners for Broadwater and Hitchin Hundred and paid
40s tax on his property in Preston Parish, about 3 miles south
of Hitchin. Edward must have sold his Letchworth land by this
date since tax was paid on it by his later deputy Sheriff
Edward Pulter.
1547, 54, 55 Sheriff of Herts and Essex
1547 Bedford Manor Court proceedings
1554-5 Plumstead
Marsh land licences
1555 Purchase by
Edward of land in Hitchin and Offley 22 Oct 1555, the year
before William I's death, for £80 and £40, total
£120 (HALS 58341), then in the tenure and occupation
of 'Thomas Paris of Hechyn gent' (l 8)
1557 Edward was one of the 3 witnesses to
Sir John I's will.
Written 31 Jul 1558 but not proved till
30 Oct 1584; sons William and John executors.
For 26 years he was intestate.
Edward's main legacy to wife Margaret was
all the household stuff—if she didn't remarry, a lease
and grant in Letchworth plus property in and around Hitchin:
18.
… Item I give to my wiffe a guilte Salte with a couer
that was her
19. Awnte Mykelfeildes and sixe playne
silver spoones that she did make and the best fetherbedd
20. with the bolster , the best counterpoynt with all
the shetes , tableclothes , napkynes and all other
21. Lynnen to doe withall at her pleasure . Item
I will that my saide wiffe shall haue the keeping
22. and occupying of all my 'other' howshould stuffe duringe
her lyfe , Yf she keepe her selfe sole and not
23. marrye , And after her deceasse I will yt to be devided
amongest my ffower sonnes by three
24. indifferent persons named by my exequutors
, And also I will that there be an Inventarye made
25. of all the sayde stuffe maintenaunt after my
deathe so that none of yt be embeseled . Item I will
26. and gyve to my saide wief all the Lease and graunte
with the proffitt of the same in Lech//
27. worth that my Lady Barrington my
sister haue given vnto me duringe her lief Yf shee
28. so longe lyve , and y Or else yf she dye ,
then I giue yt to my sonne William Brockett for all
29. the yeares then to comme . Item I giue and
bequeathe vnto my saide wiffe all my Landes Tenementes
30. and hereditamentes within the parishes
of Hinchin Ipolettes Ikleford muche Willmondley
for
31. terme of her lief in recompence of those Landes and
Tenementes that I didd once giue her in
32. Bradfeilde parishe to the yearlye valewe of
Twentie poundes , And after her deceasse I will
33. and give all the saide Landes Tenementes and hereditamentes
vnto Edward my sonne and
34. to the heires males of his bodye lawfullye begottenn
|
Edward's legacies to his children:
- Edward: All his property in the parishes
of Hitchin Ipolettes Ikleford Much Willmondley after Margaret's
death. His Manor of Bradfeild, and all all his property
in the parishes of Bradfeild, Russeden, Codered and Throcking.
- William: All his property in Plumpsted
Marsh in Kent and in the parish of Lechworth and Willien.
- Thomas: All his property in the parish
of Stevenage and all his property held by ... Joyner.
- John: All his property in the parishes
of Kympton, Kings Walden, Baldock, Graveley, Sheveffelde
and Hinxworth.
- 'all my saide Leases and farmes and residue of my goodes
and debtes (not before given or bequeathed) vnto Lucye
and Anne my daughters towarde the preferment of
theire marriage equally to be deuided betwene them and to
be payde at the daye of theire marriage, so that they be
ruled by theire mother and my Exequutors'.
| Probate
of Edward's will |
1. Tricesimo
die mensis Octobris Anno domini Anno Domini1
millesimo quingentesimo
2. octogesimo quarto. coram venerabili viro magistro
Willelmo Drury legum doctore curie Prerogative
3. Cantuariensis commissario etcetera in
Loco Consueto London' iudicialiter sedenti
in presentia mei Anthonij Lawe
4. Lawe,2 notarij publicj procura etcetera
comparuit personaliter Willelmus
Brockett vnius exequutorum
5. in testamento suprascripto nominatorum
et exhibuit testamentum huiusmodi ac realiter produxit
quasdam
6. Litteras administracionis bonorum
eiusdem defuncti tanqam ab intestato decedenti
alias Cuidam Edwardo
7. Brockett filio naturali et Legitimo
dicti defuncti , nonnullis ab hinc
annis elapsis concessas et allegauit
8. dictum presens administratorem
vita functum esse , dic4
esse , Necnon testamentum predictum'
verum et
9. vltimum testamentum eiusdem defuncti'
fuisse et esse , et desuper fecit fidem , Vnde
dominus ad eius
10. peticionem probauit approbauit et insinuauit testamentum
suprascriptum commisitque administra//
11. cionem etcetera Eidem'6 Willelmo
Brockett exequutori etcetera De bene etcetera
iurato Reseruata patestate
12. etc Iohanni Brockett alteri
exequutori in huiusmodi testamento nominato
cum venerit etcetera. |
1. On
30 October 1584
2. before the venerable man master William Drury doctor
of laws at the Prerogative Court
3. of Canterbury commissary etc. sitting as a judge in
the usual place in London in the presence of me Anthony
4. Lawe, public notary etc. there appeared in person William
Brockett one of the executors
5. named in the above will and he exhibited this will
and he produced in their original form certain
6. letters of the administration of the goods of the same
deceased as if he had died intestate granted3
at another place to a certain Edward
7. Brockett natural and legitimate son
of the said deceased a considerable number of years having
elapsed since this and [William Brockett] said that
8. this said administrator was dead whereas
the aforesaid will was true and
9. had been the last will of the same deceased, and on
that point he made his faith,5 whereupon the
Lord [Judge] at [William's]
10. request proved, approved and registered the above
written will and entrusted the administration
11. etc. to the same William Brockett
as executor etc. for the well [and faithful administration
of the same] having been sworn. The power being reserved
12. etc. to John Brockett the other executor
named in this will when he appears etc. |
|
Footnotes on the text of the probate
|
1. Dittography.
2. Dittography.
3. concessas (l 7).
4. The scribe seems to have written a word, crossed it
out, started another, crossed it out and then returned
to the first.
5. i.e. he swore on the Gospels.
6. It is a puzzzle why the scribe has written a capital
E here, and indeed a fancier one than elsewhere in the
document. Nor is it clear what the abbreviation in Eidem'
might be. The word is written darker than the rest of
the text and there is a mark behind it. It looks as though
the original word was scratched out from the parchment
and a new word was inserted with a fresh pen, perhaps
smudging slightly on the scratched surface. Be that as
it may, it is difficult to imagine that anything could
have been changed significantly by such a process. |
|
