The British Bradburns

The British Bradburns from 1250 to 1599.

The origin of the Old Derbyshire Bradburns.

We are lucky in trying to trace the origins of the Old Derbyshire Bradburns as they were landowners from the beginning and this means that there are plenty of old archived legal documents still in existence which name them. It is not however straightforward to fit the early Bradburns into a family tree as various documents present different views of who came after whom.
Before you begin to read this narrative about the early Derbyshire Bradburns, you may want to open their family tree from the attached database, or preferably to print it out from there. Use the link in the left-hand column of this page to go to the database and, in the search boxes, enter as first name “Unknown” and as second name “de Esseburne” (both without the inverted commas) and click “search”. In the header click “Descendants” and alter the number of generations from 4 to 13. This will give the family tree from around 1200 to 1600 in a side-to-side orientation. If you don’t want to keep switching screens from this narrative to the tree, you can print the tree either as a straight print of the screen (click print at the top right) or you can click the PDF button and print a descendancy diagram.
It has already been noted that inherited family names (or surnames) began to be used in England by those below the nobility during the thirteenth century (1200 to 1299). Because England had been conquered in 1066 by French speaking Normans and ruled by them since then, the old French language can often be found in England in this period, although the main language used for legal documents was the Latin used by the clergy. The French word “de” meaning “of” was often used in the emerging surnames to denote the place they were from (or which they owned) and the early Derbyshire Bradburns were called “de Bradeburne” in written documents to denote their ownership of the manor of Bradeburne, Derbyshire, now called Bradbourne, Derbyshire. There were however some people called de Bradeburne in legal documents who were not of the main family and in their case the de Bradeburne was used only to identify where they came from. An example is “Nicolas Robyn de Bradeburne” in which the “Robyn” is probably a surname and the “de Bradburne” is used just to identify where he lived. It is usually not difficult to separate the use of “de Bradeburne” as an inheritable surname from its use merely as a location identifier for a person, either from the name structure (the main family as Lords of the Manor used a single given name ahead of the surname, for example Roger de Bradeburne) or from the frequency of occurrence.
One version of the tree of early Derbyshire Bradburns comes from the family itself, or at least from a much later head of the family, Sir Humfrey(2) Bradburne [I3], who lived from c.1510 to 1581. During the Visitation of the Heralds to Derbyshire in 1569, a visit made to the landed families of the county to check that they were using Coats of Arms to which they were entitled, Sir Humfrey(2) provided them on 20 July 1569 with a family tree (Ref?) showing that the first-named Derbyshire Bradburn was a man called “Gerard, alias Godard, the Bradburne of Bradburne”. This tree suggests that Godard’s son was a Richard Bradburne who lived in the time of King Edward I, (1272 – 1307), and Richard’s son was Sir Roger(1) de Bradburne, Knight. We know from many documents that Sir Roger(1) de Bradeburne [I82] lived from c.1260 to c.1318 and as another document (Ref?) says that Godard obtained the Manor of Bradburne “in the time of King John”, that is between 1199 and 1216, it is possible that Sir Roger(1) was Godard’s grandson if each father was 32 when he had his son. It should be remembered that Sir Humfrey(2), in giving his family tree to the visiting Herald was describing things which happened over three hundred years before and could have become distorted in the retelling over this time. I have not so far been able to trace the document by which the manor of Bradeburne was conveyed to Godard by Sir Geoffrey de Cauz, but I am told that it is referenced in a thesis of 1984 {D62}.
According to the records of All Saints Church, Bradbourne, Derbyshire, Sir Geoffrey de Cauz (otherwise known as Sir Geoffrey le Causeis, or de Causers), who held the manor of Bradbourne, was Rector of Bradbourne church from 1183 to 1205. He was the person who supposedly gave the manor of Bradbourne to Godard or Gerard in the time of King John (ruled 1199 to 1216). A person called Godfrey was sub-rector of the church immediately afterwards, from 1205 to 1207, and it is possible that he was the Godard or Gerard to whom Sir Geoffrey de Cauz gave the manor and who was said by Sir Humphrey(2) Bradburne to be the first Bradburn. According to Sir Humphrey(2), Godard had a son Richard (de Bradeburne) whose son was Sir Roger(1) de Bradeburne.
However other documents tell a rather different story. In the nearby town of Ashbourne, Derbyshire (Ordnance Survey map reference SK179465), then called Esseburne, lived a Sir Robert de Esseburne[I118]. In c.1220 he was named as “Seneschal (steward) to the Lord Earl of Ferrers (that is, the Earl of Derby)” {D7}. In 1243 Sir Robert was named a Justice of the Court of Common Pleas {D8} and in 1252 he was named as “King’s Constable of the High Peak” {D9}, the High Peak being the hilly area in which both Bradbourne (Bradeburne) and Ashbourne (Esseburne) are found and known today as the Peak District of Derbyshire. What is relevant to this story is that in February 1238, a Robert de Esseburne was granted the manor of Bradeburne by Reginald de Ybelund (or Ibelund) and Margaret his wife (who was the daughter of Sir Geoffrey de Cauz) {D10}, so presumably becoming the Lord of the Manor of Bradeburne. From 1228 to 1241, the Vicar of Bradbourne is named as Canon Robert de Esseburn and he is probably the same Sir Robert de Esseburne. In c.1250 Robert de Esseburne was granted (in a document in Norman French) lands at Hulland {D11}. I believe that the position and description of these lands suggests they are the land on which the Bradeburnes’ second home, the Hough, was built. The description of the “syke” which flows through it on one boundary describes the stream which runs there today. There are some undated documents from late in the reign of Henry III, 1216-1272, in the Kniveton Leiger, which refer to “Lord Robert of Bradeburne” {D18} and these may be instances of Sir Robert de Esseburne wearing his “Lord of the Manor of Bradburne” hat although he never appeared to take the “de Bradeburne” as a surname.
Sir Robert de Esseburne had two brothers, Thomas[I116] and Richard[I119] {D12} and when Sir Robert died childless in 1253 {D13}, Thomas’s son Henry de Esseburne[I114], Sir Robert’s nephew, was declared Sir Robert’s heir {D14}. In 1258, Henry de Esseburne purchased part of a Knight’s Fee in Bradeburne {D15} which suggested his continued ownership of the lordship of the manor of Bradeburne. In fact at some time between 1260 and 1269, he is described as “Henry de Esseburne, Lord of Bradeburne” {D16}. There is also a document of this period, late Henry III, referring to “Henry de Bradeburne” {D19} which may have been Henry de Esseburne using his Bradeburne title. Henry de Esseburne appears to have died in 1269 as in that year “Margery, widow of Henry de Esseburne, sued Matthew of Kniveton for her dower” {D17}. This was a process that a widow had to go through in order to legally inherit the assets of her late husband.
We now have to take a step which I have not yet been able to fully document and that is to Roger(1) de Bradeburne[I82] (later Sir Roger), c. 1260 – c. 1318, who I believe was the son of the late Henry de Esseburne/Henry de Bradeburne. We do know that Roger(1) de Bradeburne’s father was called Henry of Bradeburne from a document dated 10 November 1292 in the Kniveton Leiger {D20}. As stated above, Henry died in 1269, but dated references to Roger(1) de Bradeburne do not begin until 1284 {D21}, so there is a fifteen-year gap between generations. The suggestion is that Roger(1) was still young when his father Henry died and there is a reference {D60}, dated 1269, which says that young Roger, who was the son of Henry of Ashbourne, was brought up by Margaret the Countess of Derby. There is an extract in a book of 1938 {D61} in which it states, “Roger is the son of Henry of Ashbourne and is in the custody of Margaret countess Derby and lands in the custody of Edmund king’s son”.  The family would have been well known to the Earl and Countess of Derby because of the time spent by Sir Robert de Esseburne as an earlier Earl’s steward. In 1298, a document confirms Roger de Bradeburne as holding the manor of Bradeborne for one half of a knight’s fee. At the same time, he also held “Le Houg” (the Hough) for one twenty-third and one twelfth of a knight’s fee and Offedecote for one fortieth of a knight’s fee {D22}. Roger(1) was first described as “militibus” (knight) in a document of 1292 {D23} and was first described as “Lord Roger de Bradeburne” (ie. Lord of the manor of Bradeburne) in the same document. We think he was born around 1260 so why he was not given these titles in earlier documents, until he was around 32 years old, is not clear. Roger is named in at least 85 contemporary documents and was given official positions such as “Commissioner of Oyer and Terminer for Derbyshire” a number of times between 1309 and 1318.
Whether or not the de Esseburnes can be proved to be the ancestors of Roger(1) de Bradeburne, Roger is certainly the first person to bear the inherited surname Bradburn whose existence is well documented and who was the ancestor of a long line of Bradburns which can be traced down to people living today.
It is possible that both stories of the founding of the Bradburn dynasty are correct and that Godfrey/Godard/Gerard was given the manor by Sir Geoffrey de Cauz in 1205 and that Godfrey passed it to Robert de Godfrey, sub rector of the church from 1207 to 1214, who may have been his son. The manor may have been taken from Robert de Godfrey when the Prior of Dunstable became fed up with the “incontinent – that is, married” priests and removed them. The manor may then have reverted to the de Cauz family and passed to Sir Reginald de Ybelund, son in law of Sir Geoffrey de Cauz. Sir Reginald de Ybelund then granted it to Sir Robert de Esseburne. The Prior of Dunstable, under whom the Church of Bradbourne came, had in 1214 issued a suit at the court in Rome to remove the rectors, so it looks as though the sub-rectorship was removed from Robert de Godfrey (son of Godfrey – Godard?) in 1214 and held until 1238 by Sir Reginald de Ybelund and his wife, Margaret, daughter of Sir Geoffrey de Cauz, who in that year granted it to Robert de Esseburne {D10} and {D63}.
Roger(1) de Bradeburne had at least three sons, the eldest of which, Henry(1) de Bradeburne [I84], (bef. 1293 – 21 Mar 1322), perhaps named after his grandfather, became head of the family in around 1318 when his father Sir Roger(1) died. Henry(1), although the son of a respected county person, turned out to be a bad egg. In 1313 he was pardoned together with the Earl of Lancaster, and many others, for things taken at Newcastle-upon-Tyne and elsewhere {D24}. In 1317, as mentioned earlier, he was accused of rape in Cheshire but acquitted {D25}; the husband of the woman he had been accused of raping was imprisoned instead! In 1322 Henry(1) joined the Earl of Lancaster in his ill-fated rebellion against the king, Edward II, and when this ended in defeat at the Battle of Boroughbridge in Yorkshire, Henry(1) was one of six key followers of the Earl who were hanged at Pontefract on 21 March 1322 {D26}. Apart from bringing shame upon the family, the King took all Henry(1)’s properties, effectively leaving the whole family penniless. This set off a number of petitions by Henry(1)’s mother, Phillippa de Bradeburne, the widow of Sir Roger(1), for the return of the family properties {D27}, which seem ultimately to have been successful.
After the disaster of Henry(1), the family seems to lose status and there are accusations of illegal hunting and assault brought against the family members. A difficulty in tracing the family over the next 100 years is in deciding who was the head of the family, over which period of time, and how the various Bradburns were related. Some clues are in the frequency of appearances in legal documents and from the family tree of Sir Humfrey(2) Bradburne in 1569, although this was produced over 200 years later than some of the relationships named in it. I do not think that I have the definitive story of the family from 1322 to 1432 when Henry(2) became head of the family. What follows (and what is in the attached database) is my best attempt to put the family together over that time.
For details of the first few generations of Bradburns, from Sir Roger(1) onwards, I can recommend the website of Mark Allen{D59}, which has full transcriptions of all contemporary documents. I only disagree with Mark over the father of Sir Roger(1) who he says was either Richard or Robert but I think was Henry (de Esseburne/Bradeburne), as named in the Kniveton Leiger – see {D20}.
Roger(2) de Bradeburne[I4] was given as the second son of Roger(1) in the Visitation Tree of 1569 and it seems that Roger(2) became the head of the family after Henry(1)’s execution. Roger(2) is however only mentioned, in documents I have seen, from 1325 to 1327.
After these two years, the documents relate to William(1) de Bradeburne[I5], Richard[I87] and John[I86] de Bradeburne. I believe that these are the remaining three brothers of Henry(1) and Roger(2) and sons of Sir Roger(1). What I haven’t been able to be clear about is whether or not they all had the same mother. On my tree I have William(1) as the son of Sir Roger(1)’s first wife Margery and John and Richard as sons of the second wife, Phillippa. However, Phillippa is listed as the mother of the late Henry, but perhaps they meant step-mother {D28}. At first, in 1327, John and William(1) were pardoned for Outlawry, which seemed to mean that they had not shown up in front of the justices of Oyer and Terminer to answer various charges of trespass {D29}. In 1329, John and William(1) were accused with others of illegal hunting on the properties of Henry, Earl of Lancaster {D30}. Warrants were issued in 1330 to arrest John and William(1) and others and bring them to Nottingham Castle {D31} but it is not clear if this relates to the illegal hunting or to another charge.  To make matters worse, in 1331 Richard, John and William(1) were accused with about 25 others (collectively referred to as the Coterels and their gang) of assaulting the vicar of Bakewell, Derbyshire and carrying away his goods {D32}.
A document dated 25 Nov 1334 {D33} has a John de Bradebourne as a monk under the Prior of Tutbury. Is this the same John[I86] who was a member of a disreputable gang, now seeking shelter from the law, or is this another relative of the same name?
In 1339, Florentine merchants acknowledged large debts to Richard de Bradeburne and Henry Torold, citizens of Chester, probably for wool delivered to London {B2}. Again, was this Richard[I87], the alleged former gang member, having left Derbyshire and moved to Cheshire? At this time in history, Cheshire had a reputation as a refuge for outlaws and in view of the court cases in which Richard was involved he could well have sought refuge there.  In 1343, Richard Bradbourne of Cestre (Chester) and forty or fifty others were accused by Edward, Duke of Cornwall and Earl of Chester, of various maritime offences in Cornwall including carrying away goods washed ashore and carrying tin in vessels without his licence {D34}. A week later Richard and ten others were accused of taking over an abandoned ship in Falmouth which the Duke had claimed and stripping it of its cargo worth £3,000 and sinking it {D35}. This seems to have been connected with the previous writ of a week earlier as all ten people accused with Richard in the second writ were also among the large number of people named in the earlier writ. It seems that Richard’s crime was claiming as salvage a ship which the Duke then tried to wrest from them using the courts. In 1345 Roger de Bradebourne, William de Shrouesbury and Richard de Ditton with Katherine his wife were named as executors of the will of Richard de Bradebourne of Chichester {D36} (had Richard moved from Chester to Chichester, perhaps to escape the Duke of Cornwall, or was Chichester an error in the document, or was this a completely different Richard de Bradeburne?). The executors appointed two people to pursue a recognisance of £203 made in chancery by John Baruncel, merchant of the society of the Peruzzi. This could be the substantial Florentine debt of 1339 mentioned above. It also suggests that Richard[I87] was dead by 1345.
We then have references in 1350 to a Robert Bradborn, master of a ship called le Nicholas of Chestre {D37}. Although it doesn’t say he lived in Chester, it is possible that he was the son of Richard and continuing his father’s trading activities. It seems that he was also continuing Richard’s piratical activities, as he and others were to be arrested for seizing a ship called la Trinite of Fawy (Fowey) laden with £1000 of cargo including wheat and other victuals bound for the king’s castle at Bordeaux. It seems that Robert survived this ordeal as in 1353 in Chester a Robert de Bradbourn granted a recognizance for £20 to Nicholas Eccleston, a carpenter {D38}.
We then come to a document {D43} which mentions several of the Derbyshire Bradburns as it is a writ for the recovery of various properties held by the Bradburn family which were about to move into the ownership of another family because a number of the Bradburns at that time died childless. The relationships given on the document confirm the family tree we have of the three generations below Sir Roger(1) de Bradeburne, and add that William de Bradburne [I9] and his wife Margaret [I92] died without children, as did John de Bradburne [I86]. This meant that Roger(3) de Bradburne [I10] became the next Bradburn heir, although he was at this time (1368) underage. We have him born around 1350, so he would have been around 18 years old. Roger(3) became a member of Parliament for Derbyshire in 1397 and again in 1404 {D48}
Next comes a flurry of Cheshire documents about Bradburns. In 1375-76 a Richard Bradburne was Sheriff of Chester {D44}. In 1382, a William de Bradburn (and his wife Cecilia?) were involved in a writ for livery to, of the manor of Little Neston and Hargreve (in the Wirral, Cheshire) {D45}. There are two more mentions of this manor in connection with William de Bradburne, citizen of Chester, in 1389 and 1396/7 and he seems to have held one fifth of the manor. William de Bradburne of Chester is mentioned in documents up to 1412, by which time he may have been dead.
It would seem that a new Cheshire line of Bradburns had developed, quite separately from the Derbyshire ones. However, one person who is documented from 1420 to 1432, John de Bradburne[I12], throws something of a spanner into the works and is the one person who doesn’t fit easily into either the Cheshire camp or the Derbyshire one, but probably has to fit into both. A John Bradburn is mentioned in two Derbyshire documents in 1423 and 1424. A document of around 1426 {D46} has John Doune esq, of Utkinton, Cheshire, master forester of the forest of Delamere, Cheshire, versus John de Bradbourn del Hogh, (ie of the Hough, the second home of the Derbyshire de Bradburns) county Derby and Cecily his wife. This must be John(1) de Bradeburne[I12]. The charge is that following the death of Thomas del Mere, the son of Cecily by her first marriage, she sent her servants daily to murder John Doune and his servants. Maybe Thomas had been killed by the forester while poaching game in the forest and Cecily was looking for revenge.
On 18 Dec 1431, a document {D47} shows that John and Cecily gave the manor of Little Budworth, Cheshire, together with lands and tenements in Little Neston, Hargrave (are these the same lands mentioned earlier in connection with William de Bradburne, citizen of Chester?) and elsewhere in Cheshire, to her daughter and son-in-law, Walter Twyford and Margaret. This seems once again to tie together the Derbyshire and Cheshire arms of the Bradburns. However, Sir Humphrey(2) Bradburne does not show this John(1) de Bradburne in his family tree for the Visitation of 1569, so maybe he was a younger brother and not a head of the family as I show him. Little Budworth was probably part of Cecily’s inheritance, as before her marriages she was Cecily de Grosvenor, possibly an ancestor of the family of the current Duke of Westminster, Hugh Grosvenor, the 7th Duke, whose Eaton Hall estate is not far from Little Budworth. At present I do show John(1) as a head of the family, as the son of Roger(3) de Bradburne (c. 1350 – c.1404) and the father of Henry(2) Bradburne (c. 1395 – c. 1455), but it is possible that Henry(2) was the son of Roger(3) as Sir Humphrey suggests.
With the coming of Henry(2) Bradeburne[I14] as head of the family in around 1432, the family tree becomes much better defined. Henry is mentioned in around fifteen documents from 1432 until 1452 and from the 1440s his son John(2)Bradburne[I16] is often mentioned alongside him. In fact, in 1443, sons John(2) and William are mentioned as being archers in France with the expedition of the Duke of Somerset {ref}.
John(2) took over as family head in about 1455 and is remembered chiefly for having founded two chantries, one at his home, the Hough at Hulland and one at St Oswalds Church in Ashbourne {D49}. He was also the person who was honoured with the Order of Granada by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Castile and Aragon (Spain) for helping them to drive the Moors out of Spain and to make it a Christian kingdom once again. The decorations on his tomb which can be seen inside in St Oswalds Church in Ashbourne attest to this. His wife, Ann Vernon, has a necklace of cockleshells on her effigy which suggest that she made a pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostella in north-west Spain.

John Bradburnes tomb
The tomb of John Bradburne and Ann Vernon in St Oswald’s Church, Ashbourne, Derbyshire

John(2)’s son, Humphrey(1) Bradburne[I19], took over in about 1490, and Humphrey(1)’s will of 1519 is available. Humphrey(1) is followed by his son, John(3) Bradburne[I25], in about 1520.
After John(3) comes the most significant of the Derbyshire Bradburns, Sir Humphrey(2) Bradburne[I3], who lived from about 1510 to 1581. He married Elizabeth Turville, daughter of Sir William Turville of Newhall, Leicestershire, and had eight children with her.
Sir Humphrey(2) Bradburne was knighted at Butterden in Scotland on 18th May 1544 for his part in the “Rough Wooing” military expedition to Edinburgh and was a member of parliament for Derbyshire in 1553 and 1555 {D48}. He was a Justice of the Peace in Derbyshire for over 40 years and served two terms as Sheriff. He was a Member of Parliament for Derbyshire in 1553 and 1555 {D51}.
It is said that the Bradburnes retained their catholic faith even during the reign of the protestant queen, Elizabeth I, and it seems that they suffered social harm because of this. A transcription of Sir Humphrey(2)’s will, which accounts for all the properties acquired by the Bradburns over the previous three centuries, is attached (say where). In c.1581 there was an indictment of a Richard Haughton, late of “Lee”, county Derby, for causing the death of H. Bradborne: Lea, Derbyshire {D50} and {D59}. This would appear to be the death of Sir Humphrey, and the Parliamentary History {D51} suggests that poisoning was suspected. Sir Humphrey(2)’s ornate tomb can be seen in St Oswald’s Church in Ashbourne.

Sir Humphrey's tomb
The tomb of Sir Humphrey and Lady Elizabeth Bradburne in St Oswald’s Church, Ashbourne, Derbyshire.

Sir Humphrey(2) was the last of the old Derbyshire Bradburns living at Lea Hall and the Hough in Derbyshire as his eldest son William(2) Bradburne[I40] in 1594 sold off the family properties to his brother in law Sir Humfrey Ferrers of Tamworth (married to Anne Bradburne) by whom the estate passed down to George, Marquess of Townshend, of Raynham Hall in Norfolk, whose family in turn sold the Bradbourne estate in 1809 to Philip Gell of Hopton Hall. The Townshend family retained the Bradbourne family and estate papers which have proved difficult to access. William (2) Bradburne and his wife Frances Priest went in 1549 to live at Caulke Abbey, a 99-year lease on which, John Priest, father of Frances had taken out in 1537 on the dissolution of the abbeys by king Henry VIII . William(2)  is also remembered as having been one of the founders in 1585 of the Queen Elizabeth’s Grammar School, Ashbourne, Derbyshire which is almost opposite St Oswald’s Church, Ashbourne where some early Bradburnes are buried. William(2) Bradburne and his wife Frances had a daughter Grace who married  Thomas Holte, later Sir Thomas Holte, baronet, of Aston Hall near Birmingham.

 

The Old Kent Bradburns

It is more difficult to trace people who may have taken their surname from the manor of Bradbourne in the county of Kent. This is because the Lords of the Manor of Bradbourne, Kent did not use the name of their manor as their surname – early Lords of the Manor included Mareschall, Grandison, Isley and Bosville and since 1666 the Lords of the Manor were baronets called Twisden, although I think, confusingly, they lived at nearby Bradbourne House in East Malling, (Ordnance Survey Landranger Map 188, ref TQ 703578) some ten miles east of Bradbourne, Kent, so may not have been directly connected to Bradbourne, Kent. Another confusion, suggested by those who currently write about the history of Bradbourne, Kent is that earlier historians often confused Bradbourne, Kent with Brabourne, Kent, (no “d”) which is about 40 miles to the south-east of our Bradbourne.
There are however some early mentions of Kent people who were identified using the second name Bradbourne. It is only from about 1580 that Kent records show Bradburns who seem to be using it as a hereditary surname and these people are concentrated around the area of East Malling. I do therefore believe that a hereditary surname developed in one or more families from Kent in the sixteenth century, but I cannot at present trace the origin of their family or families. They could be the ancestors of some of the Bradburn families found in the London area in later times.
The first mention I have come across of a Bradburn in Kent is a mention of a Ralph de Bradbn dated 1210 {D52}. A Philip de Bradburne is mentioned in 1266/7 as the father of Roger the bedel of Chartham, {D53}, so this doesn’t seem to be a hereditary use of the name. In 1269 a document names Robert de Bradeburn and his sons William, Jordan, John and Roger {D54} together with the Sheriff of Kent. In 1279, a Thomas de Bradebourne is mentioned in a document {D55} as holding some land. In 1293, a William de Bradeborn is mentioned in an Inquisition Post Mortem {D56}. Between 1317 and 1338 there are three mentions of “John son of Roger Robyn de Bradebourne” {D57}, which suggest that the surname of this family is Robyn and the de Bradebourne appears to be merely a place identifier.
There are further mentions of Bradburns in Kent. One on 30th Sep 1562 {D58} refers to a Mr Bradborne who is in dispute with the town authorities of Faversham, Kent. The other documents refer to Katheryn Bradburne and Syeth Bradburne who were christened on 6 October 1588 in East Malling, Kent, father William Bradburne. This looks like a Kent family with the inherited surname of Bradburn. Other Bradburn christenings in the area occurred in 1594, 1596 and 1597 and there are further ones in the seventeenth century.
Those parish records that I have seen of christenings, marriages and burials of Bradburns in Kent do not easily connect together to form an ongoing family, so if there was an ongoing family of Bradburns in Kent, they were either not landowners, so not much documented, or may have moved north to London. The case is not closed but I have not yet been able to build a family of Bradburns from the earliest times in Kent, although there was clearly an ongoing Bradburn surname there after about 1580.

The history and holders of a surname