On 27 May 1684 when Elizabeth was 29, she married Thomas BOORMAN, son of William BOORMAN & Sarah, in St Peter & St Paul, Wadhurst, Sussex, England. Born on 24 Feb 1666/67 in Hawkhurst, Kent, England. Christened in 1666/67 in Hawkhurst, Kent, England. Thomas died in Cranbrook, Kent, England, in Jul 1698; he was 31. Buried on 15 Jul 1698 in Cranbrook, Kent, England.
- 1666/67 baptism from the Hawhurst parish records KFHS CD:
“The baptism of Thomas BOREMAN, son of William and Sarah is shown at Hawkhurst in 1666/1667 (no precise date) but date of birth is given as 24 Feb. William is the same, date 1664 and date of birth 21 Apr. Mary is there, baptised 11 May 1662 born 27 Apr but just William given as father. Now, this is new to me, I found the baptism of Elizabeth BOREMAN on 20 Feb 1652/53 with William as father and a note of "civil war period"”
- 1684 England, Select Marriages, 1538–1973
Name: Thomas Boorman
Gender: Male
Marriage Date: 27 May 1684
Marriage Place: Wadhurst, Sussex, England
Spouse: Elizabeth Hayward
FHL Film Number: 2186717
Reference ID: ln 39
- Husbandman of Hartley in Cranbrook Kent
- 1698 England Deaths and Burials, 1538-1991
Name: Thomas Boreman
Gender: Male
Burial Date: 15 Jul 1698
Burial Place: Cranbrook
Indexing Project (Batch) Number: B02880-9 , System Origin: England-EASy , GS Film number: 1751814
ALSO Batch I06879-3
RESEARCH NOTES
- Other trees list siblings for Thomas Boorman: Mary 1662, William 1664 and Sara 1675.
- Speculation only that they also had a son John Boorman who married Ester Meopham???
- As their first son Thomas Boorman was born 17 Oct 1684, less than 9 months after their marriage, this "development" likely prompted their marriage and its location in a different parish, across the border in Sussex.
- familysearch id KVJB-VGM by matthewpurves1 shows him married to Elizabeth Hayward
OR familysearch id M9SS-28C shows no marriage, birth 24 Feb 1667)); also PRF submission id MMD8-NBX
From other researchers:
- Thomas Boorman (1666??-1698), husbandman of Hartley in Cranbrook, who you mention as the son of William Boorman of Hawkhurst. I think this is unlikely because there are some better candidates:
> There is Thomas the son of Thomas and Ann [Iden] Boorman, baptised Cranbrook in 1662
> or Thomas the son of John and Ann Boorman, baptised Cranbrook in 1646 (probably too early).
> But his most likely father is John Boorman of Hartley, Cranbrook who was buried in 1681.
Thomas (1666??-1698) may well have been a nonconformist as there is no record of his children's baptisms in the C of E registers, and his son William (c.1692-1771) was a lifelong member of the Baptist Chapel at Headcorn.
John Boorman of Hartley (?-1681) was possibly a nonconformist because there is no record of any of his children in the registers. However, you can avoid the Church of England but you can't avoid the taxman. In the Cranbrook ratebooks a John Boorman paid rates for a house and land in Hartley up to 1680 when he disappears, and from 1681 onwards 'our' Thomas Boorman (1666??-1698) pays rates for the same property. It is likely (but not certain) that Thomas would have been of full age (over 21) at this time or a trustee or guardian would have been named instead. John (?-1681) does not appear to have left a will, so the most likely explanation is that the property was inherited by his son Thomas.