"Thomas Baker (1540-1626), a younger son of Richard Baker of Sissinghurst, Kent"[1] and his father's first wife, Catherine Tyrrell, daughter of John Tyrrell of Heron, Essex.[2]
He married first Griselda Barnes c. 1602 and second Constance Kingsmill.[2]
Sir Thomas Baker of Whittingham Hall, Suffolk, and Leyton, Essex, was the 2nd son of Sir Richard Baker of Sissinghurst, Kent, by his 1st wife, Catherine Tyrell (dau. of John Tyrell of Heron, Essex). He m. (1) Griselda Barnes and (2) Constance Kingsmill 2 or 3 s, 1 da. He d. 10 Apr. 1625, and his will was contested and upheld by sentence 16 Feb 1626 in favor of his elder son Thomas against younger brother Richard and sister Elizabeth.[3]
Children
Thomas, (b. c.1606-1657) heir of his father 1626. he m. Alice Leman, eldest da. of Robert Leman of Brightwell, Suffolk who m. (2) in 1659 Charles Goring, 2nd Earl of Norwich and retained his leasehold property and Forest House, while his freehold property was inherited by Elizabeth's son Sir John Hanmer, 3rd Bt.[4][5]
Elizabeth Baker, sister and heir to her brother Thomas m. Sir Thomas Hanmer, 2nd Bt, 1s. Sir John Hanmer, 3rd Bt.[7][8]
Research Notes
His wife Dame Constance made a will in 1625 which names all 3 children (see her profile).
There is an unsourced gedcom which has him as the son of John Baker (b. 1504, Sissinghurst, Kent, England, d. Dec 1558, Norwich, Norfolk, England) and Elizabeth Dineley (b. 1515, Kingsclere, Hampshire, England, d. 1550, Cranbrook, Kent, England), married 1539 in Kent.[9] This doesn't match information in the History of Parliament.
↑ According to the Alumni Oxonienses 1500-1714, Thomas matriculated Wadham College at Oxford University on 10 Oct 1623, aged 17. His brother Richard matriculated there a year later at age 15 on 29 Oct 1624. This puts Thomas almost of age when the will was upheld in 1626. Neither one graduated.[1]
Is Thomas your ancestor? Please don't go away! Login to collaborate or comment, or
contact
a profile manager, or ask our community of genealogists a question.
Baker-68023 and Baker-1807 appear to represent the same person because: When creating this profile for Sir Thomas Baker this other profile didn’t appear as an option as a match, I’m now merging as they are the same person
Baker-6651 and Baker-1807 appear to represent the same person because: Still clearly the same person. DOB is unknown either way. DOD now the same. Narrative mentions both wives and uses same History of Parliament article.
The narrative on 6651 says his wife was Griselda Barnes, who is attached to 1807. 1807 has the son Richard for which 6651 doesn’t yet have but is mentioned in the narrative. I fixed the DOD as that’s sourced on the other profile.
Baker-6651 and Baker-1807 appear to represent the same person because: Clearly the same person. One profile has first wife, the other has the second wife.
Baker-6651 and Baker-1807 are not ready to be merged because: I'm not convinced they are the same person as the sources in one prove that the parents are the ones listed but the other profile's sources say that they are not the parents.