This article is still very much under construction. Chapter 1 is basically complete but the other chapters are still in a very rudimentary stage.Chapter 1 - Early Burberrys and the Harrowsley Family
Chapter 2 - The Focus Shifts to Newdigate
Chapter 3 - Burberrys of London
Chapter 4 - From Surrey to the World
Chapter 5 - Unplaced Surrey Burberry Families
Chapter 6 - Further Notes and Resources
1. Introduction
(Back to top)
Although the spelling of surnames varied greatly during past centuries, certain surname spellings often occurred more frequently in certain parts of a country than another. This appears to be particularly true for England, where almost all of the families I am researching originated from.
The BURBERRY surname fits this pattern. Whereas the surnames (or spelling variations) of BURBURY and BURBERY were concentrated in the area around Coventry in Warwickshire, the BURBERRY surname appeared mostly in the area around Horley, Newdigate, Betchworth and surrounding areas in the southern English county of Surrey and in neighbouring parishes and counties. The patterns of distribution for the different surname spellings becomes quickly apparent when you look at a resource such as the International Genealogical Index (IGI) [1].
The Surrey Burberry family is one of the larger family groupings that I have uncovered. As the name implies, the family appears predominantly in the southern English county of Surrey, but after early appearances in Surrey, it spread to neighbouring counties and also overseas in due course. However, it is likely that the family came into Surrey from somewhere else during the middle of the 17th century. Finding out concrete information on families around this time is difficult because of the scarcity and inaccessibility of records, so earlier origins of the surname and family are obscure.
Click here to read a discussion of the origins of the Burberry family
2. Early References to BURBERRY in Surrey and Sussex
(Back to top)
The earliest-reference to the surname BURBERRY in Surrey is with a William Burberry (d. 1684) who lived at the manor of Harrowsley near Horley in Surrey [2]. However, there are other references to families in the area that predate and are contemporary with this, bearing in mind that the surname spellings were not fixed and tended to vary.
For example, there are many references to marriages and baptisms in parish registers in London from early times. The International Genealogical Index (IGI) that has been compiled by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints contains many such early references, including an Ezekiel BURBURY had two daughters baptised in the parish of St Stephen Coleman Street in 1593 and 1599 respectively, while a Symon BURBURY or BURBERY had several children baptised at St Martin Ludgate during the years 1604 to 1620 [1].
The London parish register entries (as listed in the IGI) extend for many years starting from these early dates, and a multitude of different surname spellings are listed. Because London was the capital and the largest city in England, the people who lived there came from all over the country, and no doubt some of these Burburys and Burberys in London were not originally locals. Some of them might even have come from the Midlands counties of Warwickshire and Northamptonshire. In any case, their presence in London is clear, but their link to the Burberry family that eventually emerged in nearby Surrey is unknown.
One intriguing reference to a nearby "Burbury" is that of John Burbury, Gentleman, who was attached in some way to the household of Henry Howard, 6th Duke of Norfolk [3]. The style of "Gentleman" indicates that this John must have been a man of a certain wealth and class, and he owned land at Shere in Surrey [4]. This puts him in the same general locality and indicates that he was a contemporary of the early generations of the Surrey Burberry family, but again, I do not know if he was closely related to the Surrey family.
Click here to read John Burbury's individual biography
3. The First Surrey Burberry - William of Harrowsley
(Back to top)
William Burberry (d. 1684) was the earliest-confirmed ancestor of the Surrey Burberry family. According to the burial register for Horley, Surrey, he was buried on 5 November 1684, but the register gives no further information such as his age at the time of his death [2]. The only source that has been found that gives any sort of indication as to his age and possible date of birth is the marriage register for Horley, which records William's marriage to Eleanor SHOE on 22 September 1658. So if we assume that William was of adult age at the time of his marriage, then he was probaby born around 1638 or sometime before that. But because no other documentation to establish his age has been discovered, his exact date of birth is unfortunately a mystery. So is his place of birth. And even more regrettably, so is his parentage.
The first certain reference to William is in his marriage to Eleanor Shoe on 22 September 1658 in Horley, Surrey. According to the marriage register entry, William lived in Horne and Eleanor lived in Burstow [2]. His exact place of residence at this time is unclear, but in 1665, seven years after his marriage, he appears in land records as the purchaser of the manor of Harrowsley in Horne. And although William was described as "of Horne" at the time of his marriage to Eleanor, he is described as "of Burstow" by the time he purchased Harrowsley [5].
|
The parishes of Horne, Horley and Burstow are in the south of the county of Surrey, bordering what is now West Sussex and close to modern-day Gatwick Airport. The illustration at right shows a portion of a map of Surrey parishes, and it indicatess roughly where these three parishes were situated in relation to each other. The arrow in the illustration which is crossing the parish of Burstow and pointing to the parish of Horne is indicating that the small area to the left of Burstow where the arrow starts from is actually part of the parish of Horne. Until about 1900, the manor of Harrowsley was within the parish of Horne Detached, which is the small area where the arrow starts from. For many years Harrowsley was also a sub-manor of Bletchingley, and it was also in the Tandridge Hundred. Some of the properties were also in the manor of Burstow Lodge, and others in Horley. Nowadays the area corresponding to William's land is addressed as Horley, and the modern-day spelling has become "Haroldslea" [6]. |
 Figure 1-1. Relative Location of some Surrey Parishes |
A copy of the deed exists in the Minet Library which describes William's purchase of the manor of Harrowsley in the parish of Horne for nine hundred pounds in 1665, and a transcript of this deed follows:
"Know all men by these presents that I Thomas Beard of Woodmancote in the County of Sussex Gent, have this day of this date hereof had and received of William Burberey of Burstow in the County of Surrey Yeoman, the sum of nine hundred pounds of lawful money of England being in full of that gift of the purchase money due to me for a Manor and divers lands thereto belonging commonly called Harrowsley now sould by me and Walter Covert of Gatton in the said county of Surrey Esq. So the said William Burberey and his heirs In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seale the first day of June in the seventeenth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King Charles the Second anno dom 1665
"[signed] Thomas Beard
Sealed and delivered in the presence of John Marten and Henry Fayrehol [5]"
The plan below shows the extent of the manor of Harrowsley in 1838. This was well after the manor had passed out of Burberry ownership, so the boundaries may not be identical to what they were in the time of William Burberry.
William and Eleanor had several children who were baptised in the parishes of Burstow (William [1659], Mary [1661] and Eleanor [1662] [7]) and Horley (John [1666] [2]). The baptism of the last child John in Horley rather than Burstow tallies with the assumption that William moved from wherever he had been previously living in Burstow to his new holdings in Horne in around 1665, after his purchase of the Harrowsley Manor.
A rather nice view of the Harrowsley area can be seen on the Web, in the form of a walking map that has been prepared by the Reigate and Banstead Borough Council. Click here to view this map. Note that the map is actually in PDF format, so you will need a PDF file viewer such as Acrobat Reader to view the page. If you do use this link and successfully open the page, locate Thunderfield Castle (8) and Coldlands Farm (9). Just below Coldlands Farm is a slight upwards bump in Haroldslea Lane. Harrowsley Manor House is or was within this bump. (Further note: At the time of writing, the above link -- which worked some time ago when I started drafting this article -- no longer works. I am currently in the process of asking the Reigate and Banstead Borough Council if the link or image can be restored in some way. -- DMB)
4. Subsequent Generations at Harrowsley
(Back to top)
When William Burberry senior died in November 1684, he left a will which bestowed the bulk of his estate onto his eldest son William. A summary of this will was provided to me by Peter Cox of Haroldslea (modern-day Harrowsley).
The will mentions two houses that William left to his elder son. These were "Great Harasly" (presumably Harrowsley Manor) and Farniefields (also known as Farney Fields Farm). William's younger son John, ancestor of the Newdigate branch of the Burberry family, received 100 pounds from his father's will [8].
Click here to read a summary of William's will
A small point raised by the will is that William's daughter Mary was married to a John SHOVE [sic]. The Horley marriage register gives the name of William Senior's wife as Eleanor SHOE [2], but with the mutability of spellings at that time, her surname might just as easily have been SHOVE also -- or indeed, vice versa.
The Burberry family continued to live at Harrowsley Manor for several generations, and for slightly more than 100 years. The original purchaser, William Burberry (d. 1684) was succeeded father to son by William (1659--1700) [8], Stephen (1686--1750) [2] [9] and William (1730--1781) [10]. Following is an account of each of the holders of the manor.
(1) William Burberry (d. 1684) [2]
William was the original purchaser of the manor of Harrowsley, as mentioned above. He and his wife Eleanor had four known children, all of whom were mentioned in William's will [2] [7] [8] . They were: William (eldest son and heir) (b. 1659), Mary (b. 1661), Eleanor (b. 1662) and John (b. 1666). Mary and Eleanor both married, and the younger son John moved to Newdigate and became the ancestor of the Newdigate branch of the Burberry family.
(2) William Burberry (1659--1700) [2] [7]
William married Mary COMBER, daughter of Stephen Comber of Cuckfield in Sussex [1]. Peter Cox has provided a partial transcript of the marriage settlement for this couple, dated 2 July 1685 [11]. The language of the settlement is convoluted and hard for a layman to understand, but it gives a description of the extent of the manor of Harrowsley in teh form that was used in those days. It also described both William and his prospective father-in-law Stephen Comber as yeomen, and the settlement involved the payment of at least two lots of 200 pounds from Stephen to William. Surely it was quite a lot of money in those days!
Click here to read a transcription of the marriage settlement for William Burberry and Mary Comber
The children of William and Mary were Stephen (eldest son and heir) (b. 1686), Frances (b. 1687), Mary (b. 1689), John (b. 1690) [2] and Richard (b. 1693) [11]. Frances and Richard both died young [2]. Nothing further is known about Mary and John.
(3) Stephen Burberry (1686--1750) [2] [9]
Stephen married Mary Woodstock in the parish of St Benet Paul's Wharf in London [12]. Although Stephen was the third Burberry to own the manor of Harrowsley, he may also have owned land elsewhere. At the time of making his will in 1746, he describes himself as "of Horne" [10]. Even earlier than this, an indenture of release describes him as "Stephen Burberry of Bletchingley" [9].
Stephen and Mary had four sons and five daughters: Anne (b. 1725), Mary (b. 1727), William (eldest son and heir) (b. 1730), Elizabeth (b. 1733), Sarah (b. 1735), John (b. 1738), Thomas (b. 1740), Henry (b. 1743) and Jane (b. 1747), all of whom were baptised in the parish of Saint Mary the Virgin, Horne [13].
Stephen's will mentions all of the above children, most of whom were still children or in infancy at the time the will was written in 1746. The youngest child Jane (or Jenny) had not even been born yet, although she gets a mention as "the Child wherewith my said wife is now ensient [sic]" [10]. As would normally happen, the will stipulated that after the death of Stephen's wife Mary, the manor of Harrowsley was to pass to Stephen's eldest son William.
Click here to read a transcript of Stephen's will
There has been some dispute among a few Burberry researchers about marriages for some of Stephen and Mary's children. The Newdigate parish registers have recorded a marriage between a John Burberry and a Sarah Burberry on 23 February 1756 [14]. The problem with this marriage centred around the identification of who was John and who was Sarah. From a close examination of the records, I have concluded that it was Stephen's son John who married his cousin Sarah Burberry of the Newdigate Burberry family. Nothing further is know of the two sons Thomas and Henry, and so they are potential ancestors of more unknown or unplaced Burberry families.
(4) William Burberry (1730--1781) [2] [10] [13]
William, great-grandson of the original William Burberry, was the last Burberry to hold Harrowsley Manor. He received it from the will of his father Stephen who died in around March 1750 [2], although his father's will stipulated that William was to accede to the property only after his mother Mary had died [10]. Mary Burberry's date of death is unconfirmed -- in fact, her date of birth is also ubnknown. However, the Horley parish registers have a record of a Mary Burberry of Horne who was buried on 17 March 1789 [2], and this might be the burial record for William's mother. As she married her husband Stephen Burberry in 1724 [12], a year of death of 1789 would not be unreasonable, quite respectable in fact.
Whether the burial record from 1789 is Mary's or not, she was certainly still alive in 1774 around the time her son William was selling Harrowsley. A solicitor's receipt dated 18th June 1776 mentions the following:
1774 - Attending you and perusing the Will of your father and Taking Instruction to peruse the Conveyances on behalf of your Mother and yurself and to take care of the Interests of Her and you and your Brothers and Sisters in respect of their Legacies ...
The solicitor's receipt goes on to mention:
September 29 & 30 Attending at Reigate & work on behalf of Mr. Russell the Mortagee and also on behalf of you and your Mo[the]r to settle divers things concerning the Business and to get the conveyances executed [15].
The "divers things" here probably involved a convoluted legal fiction known as a "common recovery", which was one of the only ways that property could be sold out of a family in England at the time. A simplified description of how this worked can be seen online at the following website:
www.sourcetext.com/lawlibrary/underhill/04.htm
So from this, it would seem that the manor of Harroswley passed out of the hands of the Burberry family in 1774, approximately 110 years after it had been originally purchased by William Burberry's great-grandfather William. I do not have a copy of the documents that would have been generated during the conveance, apart from the solicitor's receipt mentioned above, but this receipt indicates that the property was sold to a "Mr. Wonham" [15].
Wonham was a fairly common name in the Horley area at this time, and indeed there was a marriage that occurred between the Burberry and Wonham families some time after the sale of Harrowsley took place. This was a marriage between Thomas Burberry and Rebecca Wonham, which was performed in the Surrey parish of Newdigate in 1794 [14]. Thomas was a descendant (in fact a great-grandson) of John Burberry, the younger son of William who was the original purchaser of Harrowsley. Rebecca's father was a Thomas Wonham (apparently styled "the Elder" to distinguish him from his son Thomas), who owned quite a bit of land in the parishes of Newdigate and Charlwood [16].
Click here to read a transcript of Thomas Wonham the Elder's will (pending -- anyone want to volunteer to help out?)
It is not clear that Thomas Wonham the Elder was the purchaser of Harrowsley. Thomas Wonhan's will, which was proved in 1805, mentions land in the parishes of Newdigate and Charlwood which he left to his sons Thomas and Christopher. However, there was no mention of any estates in Horley included in Thomas' holdings [16]. In addition, have a look at the following notes made by Peter Cox of Haroldslea on land tax assessments around Harrowslea during this period
[The proprietor first, then the tenants. The property is rarely identified.]
1780; Thomas Wonham, himself £5.12.0 Also John Brooker, himself £3.10.0.
1787; Thomas Wonham, himself £5.16.6. Lashford Penfold £0.11.6. Also John Brooker, himself £3.10.0. Also a William Smith had Richard Loger as his tenant.
1788; Sir Robert Clayton, Wm Burberry £5.16.5. Late Brooker £3.10.0, Wm Wonham £0.11.6.
1789; Late Wonham, Wm Burberry £5.16.6. Late Brooker, £3.10.0. Late Penfold. £0.11.6. [17]
The transition from a certain Thomas Wonham to a "Late" Wonham (indicating someone who is now deceased) suggests that the Mr Wonham who purchased Harrowsley may have been at least one generation earlier than Thomas Wonham the Elder mentioned above. Further searching of records dealing with Harrowsley after the sale by William Burberry might give further clues on the matter. (Note: The W[illiam] Burberry mentioned in the above notes was probably the son of William who sold Harrowsley. I have no solid knowledge of this younger William past his baptism in Burstow in 1760 [7], but it is possible that he was the William Burberry of Horne who was the father of an Abner Burberry.)
Another question that hangs over the sale of Harrowsley by William Burberry is: why did William sell the estate at all? I do not know why. However, the solicitor's receipt that gives some details of the sale mentions a "Mr. Russell (the mortgagee)" [15]; and although it was not uncommon for a property to be mortgaged even while it was still being run as a going concern, the reaon for William's sale might have been financial hardship.
5. The Horley Branch After the Sale of Harrowsley
(Back to top)
William Burberry married Hannah Phillips on 22 March 1754 at St Gregory by St Pauls, London [18]. Although William gave his residence as Horne (the location of Harrowsley) at the time of his marriage, all of his children that were born between 1755 and 1767 were baptised in the neighbouring parish of Burstow [7] -- probably because William's residence was actually Horne Detached, the "island" which was sandwiched in between the parishes of Horley and Burstow and which did not actually connect physically to the main part of the parish of Horne and had no parish church of its own.
The identification made here of the marriage and subsequent children of William would appear to be correct, but a small doubt does still remain. The reason for the doubt is based on the fact that this was essentially the senior branch of the Surrey Burberry family, and wherease earlier generations were in command of money, there is nothing to show that the generations after William were similarly well off. And indeed one of their number ended up being transported to Van Diemen's Land for theft.
William married Hannah Phillips on 22 March 1754 at St Gregory by St Pauls, London [18], which I suppose was some distance away from Horne. I do not know why they married there -- William's residence was given as Horne and Hannah's was given as Burstow -- but although I have not sighted the original marriage register entry, it would appear to be the correct William being married here, as after all he lived in Horne and there were no other William Burberrys around at this time.
Following this, the children of William and Hannah Burberry clearly appear in the baptism registers for Burstow and Horne [7] [13], and again there was no other couple by that name anywhere in the area -- so it may smply be that my doubts are unfounded and the identification made here is secure. If it could ever be discovered, knowing the reason why William sold Harrowsley would probably help to clarify the matter.
Information on William and Hannah's children is actually fairly sparse apart from their names and baptisms. Two of their sons, Thomas (b. 1762) and Ambrose (b. 1775) married and had further issue, but their other sons William (b. 1760) and Stephen (b. 1767) are two more "loose ends" who might possibly be ancestors of other Burberry branches. It is possible that the son William was the ancestor of an unplaced branch of the Burberry family. You can read more about this theory in Chapter 5 - Unplaced Surrey Burberry Families in the section on William Burberry of Horne.
Click here to read about the "unplaced" William Burberry of Horne
One of the children of William and Hannah, Thomas (b. 1762) married Amy Luckin and had quite a few children, many of whom unfortunately died in infancy or at a young age [7] [13]. Their children mostly appear to have been baptised in Burstow, but towards the end of his life Thomas moved to Worth in Sussex (not far away, in modern terms it was only a few miles south along the M23 motorway), where he died in 1817 [7].
One of the children of Thomas and Ann was a Stephen Burberry (1792--1853) of Worth who was transported to Van Diemen's Land (present-day Tasmania) for stealing some fleeces of wool [19]. You can read more about this on the individual biography page for this Stephen.
Click here to read Stephen Burberry the convict's individual biography
The other son of William and Hannah of whom something definite is known is Ambrose, although the information is again sparse. He was the youngest child of William and Hannah, having been baptised in 1775 in Horne [13]. He married a Mary and had three children Ambrose (b. 1807), Stephen (b. 1811) and Sarah (b. 1813) who were all baptised at Kingston-upon-Thames in Surrey [1].
There were some other unplaced Burberrys who turned up in Worth in Sussex around this time. Possibly they were connected closely in some way to the family of Thomas and Ann. They are lited below, and you can click on their names to read what is known about them.
6. Loose Ends in the Senior Burberry Branch
(Back to top)
The following abridged family tree shows a summary of the "loose ends" mentioned above, or in other words, it shows the sons who were born into the senior Harrowsley branch of the Surrey Burberry family whose descendnts have not been traced.
The loose ends are shown in red. Some of these sons may have died in infancy or at a young age; or they may simply not have married. However, they might also be ancestors of some Burberry family or other that has not yet been grafted onto the main Burberry tree. Detailed discussions on some of the "ungrafted" branches of the Surrey Burberry family can be found further on in this article in Chapter 5 - Unplaced Surrey Burberry Families.
One of the loose ends -- the William Burberry born abt. 1760, son of William and Hannah -- was possibly the father of an Abner Burberry whose line continues to the present day. This is discussed more fully in the fifth chapter of this article under William Burberry of Horne.
Other than that possibility, there are no confirmed lines of descent from the senior Harrowsley branch of the Burberry family to the present day, except for one -- the line of John Burberry (b. 1738), the son of Stephen and Mary. John married his cousin Sarah Burberry of the Newdigate Burberry branch. The Newdigate Burberrys were descended from John Burberry (1666--1745) of Newdigate Place, the younger son of the original William Burberry of Burstow and Harrowsley. The story of this branch is continued in Chapter 2 - The Focus Shifts to Newdigate.
Other related links: