Andrew Hawkins

Contents

Personal and Family Information
Pedigree Chart
Events
Multimedia
Notes

Personal and Family Information

Andrew was born about 1270 in Kent, England, the son of William [Hawkins], de Northwood, de Hokeswod, de Flegh but his mother is unknown.

He died before 3 JUL 1321 in Preston, Kent, England.

His wife was Joan de Nash. They were married, but the date and place have not been found. Their three known children were Margery (c1304-?), Richard (c1332-c1400) and John (c1333->1374).

Pedigree Chart (3 generations)

Andrew Hawkins (c1270-<1321)	William [Hawkins], de Northwood, de Hokeswod, de Flegh (c1245-c1327)	John [Hotchkiss / Hawkins], de Northwod, de Hoxwode, de Flegh (c1225-<1310)	Nicholas [Hotchkiss], de Northwod (c1200-c1242)	+

Events

Event

Date

Details

Source

Multimedia

Notes

Birth

ABT 1270

Place:

Kent, England

Death

BEF 3 JUL 1321

Place:

Preston, Kent, England

Multimedia

VisOfKentHaw...

Notes

Note 1

!Note: Possible early ancesters of the Hawkins name definitely need more research. One Possibility might be this Andrew as a son of Roger Hotchkiss of Hawkeswood [abt 1280 - ?], the first person with the Hotchkiss name, as that name could also easily transform to Hawkins. The following DNA projects all show R-M269 as the most common Haplogroup, and also both have a significant portion of I-M253, my Haplogroup. They all have a similar mix and appear very closely related.

1. Hotchkiss “https://www.familytreedna.com/public/hotchkiss?iframe=ydna-results-overview"

2. Hoskins "https://www.familytreedna.com/public/hoskins?iframe=ydna-results-overview"

3. Hawkins "https://www.familytreedna.com/public/hawkins?iframe=ydna-results-overview"

!Note:

Andrew Hawkins was not just a lone figure in Holderness — he likely originated from Kent, where his family's real roots and ambitions were.

The Holderness connection was commercial — likely a Chapman trade base, not the family seat. It was owned jointly by Stephen Hawkins, a chapman or merchant and Andrew.

- His sons Richard [Whitstable] and John [Boughton and called of Nash] having land in Kent proves the family's center of gravity was Nash/Boughton.

- Andrew’s daughter receiving northern land [York/Holderness] as dowry explains why it left the male line — it wasn’t core, and it served a new purpose.

- Joan de Nash was likely a marriage alliance into a landed Kent family, and Nash Court came in that way.

This retroactively makes sense of how and why Nash became the center of Hawkins identity — not just where they lived, but where they ascended into the gentry.

- His brother Stephen, a chapman, held land jointly with him in Preston and likely served as guardian to Andrew’s young daughter Margery after his death.

!Source: Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward II, File 65 https://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol6/pp139-149

#244. ANDREW HAUKYN of Preston in Holdernesse.

Writ. 3 July, 13 Edward II. [25 Apr 1307-1327, so 3 Jul 1320]

[YORK.] Thursday the eve of the Assumption, 14 Edward II.

Preston. A messuage, 1/2a. and 1r. land, and a toft and 6a. land, 2a. 1r. meadow, and pasture for a fat beast in the ox marsh [in marisco boum] held jointly with Stephen Haukyn his brother who survives, and the heirs of the said Andrew, of the king in chief, as of the honour of Albemarle, by knight’s service.

Margery his daughter, aged 2 1/2, is his next heir.

C. Edw. II. File 65. [9.]

!Source: WikiTree Andrew Haukyn https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hawkins-226

Born about 1280 [uncertain] in Kent, England [uncertain]

Died 7 Jun 1321 at about age 41 in Preston, Kent, England [uncertain]

Andrew Haukyn formerly Hawkins aka Haukyn

Son of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]

[spouse unknown]

[children unknown]

Biography

Andrew Haukyn was a real person who is attested from several sources in the early 1300s, from which it appears that he died on 7 Jun 1321.[1][2] He lived in the village of Preston in Holderness in the East Riding of Yorkshire, where he held a very, very small parcel of land jointly with his brother Stephen, who was a chapman. His heir at the time of his death was his 2 1/2 year old daughter Margery or Margaret, who appeared in several later writs and inquisitions associated with the property as she came of age and when her uncle Stephen died in 1350, leaving her his portion of the land, a 6/100 part of a knight's fee. Margaret was aged 30 at the time and married to a Robert de Wasingdon or Watingedon or Wavyngdon.[3]

!Source: The visitation of Kent : taken in the years 1619-1621, page 202, by John Philipot, Rouge Dragon, Marshal and Deputy to William Camden, Clarenceux., edited Robert Hovenden, F.S.A., London 1989. [Public Library of Boston]

archive.org/details/visitationofkent00camd/page/n7/mode/2up?view=theater

Additional Pedegrees. Hawkins. [Harl. 6138, fo. 45th.]

Arms. — Quarterly : 1 and 4, Argent, on a saUire sable five fleur-de-lis or ; 2 and 3,

Azure, a chevron, between three demi-lions couped or, Hammes. Chest. — On a mount vert a hind lodged or.

Andrew Hawkins had a faire estate within the libertie of Holdernes Inq. 17 E. 3. [1374]

Son: Richard Hawkins sold diuerse lands in Whitstable to John Bedell A^ 20 R. 2. [1387]

Son: John Hawkins had lands at Boughton in Kent as appeareth by a release from John Langnath & Thomas Hayte to the same Jolin Hawkins & Joane his wife A" 4 et 7" Rici. 2

!NOTE: THE FOLLOWING BOOK, PUBLISHED 1798 SPEAKS OF ANDREW HAWKINS OF YORKSHIRE INHERITING NASH [IN KENT] BY HIS WIFE JOAN DE NASH. I WILL TAKE THIS AS A RELIABLE SOURCE AND NOT PART OF AN INTERNET HOAX.

!Source: Edward Hasted, The history and topographical survey of the county of Kent, second edition, volume 7, Canterbury 1798

https://www.durobrivis.net/hasted/octavo/1798-hasted-o-07.pdf

NASH is a mansion of account here, for having been

the seat of the family of Hawkins, as is apparent, as

well from records as from their own private evidences,

for some centuries past, and where they still reside in

their original gentility. >>> The first of them that I find

mention of, is Andrew Hawkins, who had a good

estate in the liberty of Holderness, in Yorkshire, as ap=

pears by an inquisition taken anno 17 Edward III. and

left by his wife Joane de Nash, by whom he inherited

this seat of Nash, two sons, Richard and John, the

latter of whom purchased lands in Boughton in the be=

ginning of the reign of king Richard II <<<. His son John

Hawkins, esq. was of Nash, which continued in his

descendants down to Thomas Hawkins, esq. of Nash,

who dying in 1588, æt. 101, was buried with his wife

in the north chancel of this church, under a tomb of

Bethersden marble, on which is his figure in brass, and

an inscription, which says he served king Henry VIII.

which won him fame, who was a gracious prince to

him, and made well to spend his aged days; that he was

high of stature, his body long and strong, excelling all

that lived in his age. His only son Sir Thomas Haw=

kins, likewise resided at Nash, whose eldest son Sir

Thomas Hawkins, of Nash, was a person of fine ac=

complishments and learning, and among other works

translated Causinus’s Holy Court, and died in 1640./e

In whose descendants resident at Nash, who lie all of

them buried in the north chancel of this church, this

seat at length continued down to Thomas Hawkins,

esq. of Nash, who rebuilt this seat, of which he died

possessed in 1766, æt. 92. In whose time, anno 1715,

during the ferment the nation was thrown into on ac=

count of the rebellion in Scotland, this family being of

the Roman Catholic persuasion, the seat of Nash was

plundered by some of the neighburhood. Every part

of the furniture, family pictures, writings of the estate

and family, &c. were burnt by them, with an excellent

library of books; and the family plate was carried off,

and never heard of afterwards. Of his sons, John the

eldest became his heir, and Edward-Thomas possessed

the Gower estate, at Colmans, in Worcestershire, and

took the name of Gower. John Hawkins, esq. the eldest

/e See Wood’s Ath. Ox. vol. ii. col. 261.

son, on his father’s death, became possessed of Nash, and

married Susan, daughter of Robert Constantine, esq.

of Dorsetshire, by whom he had two sons, to the eldest

of whom, Thomas, he in his life-time gave up this seat,

together with his other estates in this county. Thomas

Hawkins, esq. married Mary, the daughter of John

Bradshaw, esq. of London, descended from those of

Stretton, in Cheshire, by whom he has four daughters.

He resides at Nash, to which, with the grounds belong=

ing to it, he has made great additions and improve=

ments. The house is a large handsome building, plea=

santly situated on the summit of the hill, having a fine

prospect over the adjoining country, and has been fitted

up within these few years with much taste in the modern

stile. He bears for his arms, first and fourth, Haw=

kins, argent, on a saltire, sable, five fleurs de lis, or; se=

cond and third, Hames, azure, a chevron between three

demi lions, rampant, or./f

…,

BOUGHTON is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURIS=

DICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of

Ospringe.

The church, which is dedicated to St. Peter and St.

Paul, consists of a body and two isles, a high chancel

belonging to the parsonage, and two side chancels or

chapels. The north one, formerly St. James’s chapel,

belongs to the seat of Nash, and is filled with the mo=

numents of the Hawkins family; ….

!Source: Greenwood 1838–9 C. Greenwood, An epitome of county

history – vol. I – county of Kent . page 247.

https://www.durobrivis.net/library/1838-greenwood.pdf

Nash Court, in the Parish of Boughton-under-Blean, is a good house, and

situated in a small pleasant park, but having been uninhabited for many years, it

is in a very dilapidated state.

Nash, or Nash Court, for many centuries past, was the residence and property of the catholic family

of Hawkins. The first of this name, connected with this seat, was Andrew Hawkins, of Holderness, in

Yorkshire, who inherited Nash in right of his wife, Joane de Nash, in the reign of Edward III. from

whose descendants it has never been alienated. The present mansion was built by Thomas Hawkins,

Esq. who died in 1766, aged 92. In the year 1715, during the agitation arising from the rebellion in

Scotland, Nash Court was plundered by the populace, and the furniture, pictures, a good library, and

the deeds of the estate, were burnt, and the family plate carried off.

!Source: A Hawkins Genealogy Volume 2, Record of the Descendants of Robert Hawkins of Charleston, Massachusets, by Ralph Clymer Hawkins, photocopy from original at New England Historic Genealogical Society, 101 Newbury Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116, appears dated June 1973.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://archive.org/download/hawkinsgenealogy02hawk/hawkinsgenealogy02hawk.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwii9ObSudGMAxWxODQIHXgMKLw4HhAWegQIHBAB&usg=AOvVaw3srpGPSvgAVMqYgkacIPAs

=====================================================================

After reviewing, I find nothing to discredit this document. See my comments from next post

=====================================================================

The first of them that I find mention of, is Andrew Hawkins, who had a fair estate in the Liberty of Holdness in the co. of York, as appears by an inquisition taken anno 17 Edward III [1343-4], and left issue by his wife [Fake wife and estate was here, see below], two sons, Richard, and John, the latter of whom purchased divers lands in Boughton in the beggining of the reign of King Richard II [1367-1399].

He [John] left issue by Jane his wife, two sons, >>> Thomas <<< who was living in the beginning of King Henry IV’s reign [1399-1413], and

John, who was of Nash and had lands of the gift of William Makenade and Margery his wife, who was daughter and heir of Robert Hanes, and brought her husband such lands as Peter Hanes sold to William Makenade above mentioned. He died at the beginning of K. Henry VIth reign [1422-1461 and 1470-1471, and left issue william Hawkins, who resided at Nash- the 12th year of King Edward IV [1442-1487 so 1454].

Note: Picked birth year so that he was of age for the above mentioned inquisiton in 1343-4.

!Source: Andrew Haukyn https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hawkins-226

This and other sources have discredited work on Andrew Hawkins and especially on joan de Nash. I gave a resonse to this entry as below:

Unfortunately this is less than convincing. First, if there was indeed some conspiracy, it happened by at least the time of the 1619 Visitation of Kent and not on the internet. Inquisitions, such as you mentioned are done for a particular property. In this case saying that, "Margery his daughter, aged 2 1/2, is his next heir", does not necessarily imply that he has no other children, but rather that none others are eligible here, and that her dowry needs to be set. This could easily just mean that any others, such as the two sons mentioned in the visitation, had already received their inheritance, perhaps while Andrew was alive, and were thus not eligible here. I will agree that genealogists sometimes mess with dates too much. However, records from this time period rarely give birth or date information, but usually someplace in between. Thus, it is necessary to make educated approximations. Yes, some very dumb people have tried to move people hundreds of years in order to claim relationships. He was not fathered by Osbert and his daughter didn't marry William Amadas. However, that Margaret may well have been his great-grand daughter and so far I have found exactly one Hawkins as a possibility for her father. I have no idea if Joan de Nash is real, but she was mentioned at least as early as 1798 . Your note, however, has totally sabotaged the genealogy of this family, to where nobody knows whether to discredit any of the work that has been done for hundreds of years. For my part a visitation is supposed to be a validated document from that time period, although occasional mistakes get through. I will take it as an original source, unless the College of Arms specifically says that it is wrong or you can actually show some proof. Also, the internet is a wonderful tool for genealogists, making sources, including translations and extracts and even images from this time period available at a touch of the keyboard. It is possible to do things which would have taken years of work, and weeks of travel to accomplish before the internet, if they could have been done at all.

posted Apr 13, 2025 by You

edited Apr 13, 2025 by You

!Source: Great Britain. Public Record Office, Red Book of the Exchequer," Part I, Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1896, p. 192 https://books.google.com/books?id=RqhEAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA192&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

Apparently only original reference to Osbert de Haveringes.

=====================================================================

THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT DISCLAMED AS A FAKE WHICH HAS BECOME EMBEDED IN HAWKINS GENEALOGY.

=====================================================================

!Source: WikiTree Osbert Hawkins [abt. 1393 - 1425] https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hawkins-229

Born about 1393 [uncertain] in Faversham, Kent, England

Died 1425 at about age 32 in Nash, Buckinghamshire, England

Biography

This profile is loosely based on a supposed real person, Osbert de Hawking, who supposedly held the manor of Hawking in Kent, England during the reign of Henry II.[1] [Note that "de Hawking" may itself be a misreading of "de Haveringes" in the Red Book of the Exchequer,[2] so this should be treated tentatively unless another primary source is found.]. Several Hawkins genealogies, probably all following Plymouth Armada Heroes [1888],[3] have supposed that Osbert was a forerunner of "the" Hawkins family. However, Hawkins is usually a patronymic surname, so obviously it did not have a single forerunner. Additionally, Osbert's male line actually appears to have died out, so this is an unlikely supposition. However, numerous internet genealogies ran with this idea, and, as often happens, several of them have gone a step beyond the original supposition that Osbert was simply some sort of ancestor and turned him into the father of Andrew Hawkins [supposedly] of Nash Court, who lived in the time of Edward III.[4] Edward III [1327-1377] reigned over a century later than Henry II [1154-1189], so this idea is clearly impossible. If the sources are followed to the original, Andrew's inquisition post mortem, it appears he died in 1321.[5] [See Andrew's profile for details-the story is somewhat complicated, but there is no doubt that he died in the early 1300s.] Since these web genealogies apparently didn't bother consulting the sources, or applying any basic knowledge of English history, they simply invented some plausible-sounding dates for Osbert and Andrew, which of course completely conflict with the few actual historical sources on them. Consequently, this completely fictitious Hawkins line consisting of Osbert->Andrew->Margaret Hawkins has infiltrated numerous genealogy databases, including, unfortunately Wikitree. This profile is retained for the sake of preventing future attempts to add this bogus genealogy.

Note that some sites [e.g. http://en.rodovid.org/wk/Special:Tree/346755] have invented a chain of intermediate Osbert Hawkins to account for the gap between the real Osbert de Hawking and "Andrew Hawkins of Nash Court" [who was really Andrew Haukyn of Preston and never had anything to do with Nash Court], but these do not appear to be based on any real sources.

!Source: WikiTree Andrew [Hawkins] Haukyn [abt. 1280 - 1321] https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hawkins-226

Born about 1280 [uncertain] in Kent, England [uncertain]

Died 7 Jun 1321 at about age 41 in Preston, Kent, England [uncertain]

Andrew Haukyn formerly Hawkins aka Haukyn

Son of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]

[spouse[s] unknown]

[children unknown]

Biography

Andrew's birth year is not known, but from pragmatic considerations, we can estimate it was in the late 1200s [1280+-15 or 20 years].

Through a long series of careless mistakes and one probably intentional fraud, this Andrew Haukyn who died in 1321 and had one surviving daughter has gradually been transformed into an "Andrew Hawkins" who lived in the mid 1400s by a number of internet genealogy websites. It has been claimed that Andrew was born in 1421 and died in 1453, based on the authority of an Ancestry.com tree, to which the links are now dead.[4][5] These dubious dates were probably created in order to justify making Andrew into the father of a Margaret Hawkins who lived over 100 years later. This profile also previously had him as the father of John Hawkins, which is just as impossible. At some point, someone, perhaps Burke, also managed to invent a wife for Andrew, Joan De Nash, probably in an attempt to explain how he obtained the Nash Court estate that he didn't actually possess. See the Research Notes below for additional details.

Research Notes

Burke makes an unsourced [as usual] statement:

Hawkins of Middlesex "The first person of this family of whom anything is known is Andrew Hawkins, Esq., who was resident at Nash Court, temp. Edward III. He m. Joan de Nash, by whom he had issue, two sons Richard and John. From him descended John Hawkins Esq. of Tavistock, Devonshire, who m. Joan, dau. of William Trelawny, Esq. of Cornwall, and grand-dau. of Sir John Trelaway, descendant of Edwin, who held the lordship of Trelawny, temp. Edward the Confessor; by her he had issue, a son, Sir John Hawkins, b. in 1520 ..." [6]

According to Burke, Nash Court, the residence of the Hawkins family was established by Andrew Hawkins during the reign of Edward III [1327-1377], which obviously sets the time frame of the birth of Andrew. As it turns out, though, even this is a mistake and Andrew actually died in the reign of Edward II. The final inquisition into his estate [the sole primary source underlying Burke et al.'s version of Andrew] is dated in Edward III [1340] because his only heir, his daughter Margaret, was an infant at the time of his death in 1321. There is also no indication in any of the primary sources that Andrew had any connection to Nash Court, and indeed one of the IPMs says that the extremely modest holdings in Holderness were his only lands [this conenction to Nash Court is probably an extrapolation of the pedigree discussed below, which attempts to make Andrew the ancestor of several Hawkins who did hold Nash Court].

The descent from Andrew referred to by Burke seems to come from a Harleian manuscript of unknown provenance which is given in an edition of the Visitation of Kent.[7] The pedigree explicitly cites an inquisition post mortem of Andrew Haukyn of Holderness, which is dated 17 Edw III and says he died on 7 Jun 14 Edw. III [1340].[8] This is probably a mistake for 14 Edw. II, however,[9] so he probably really died in 1321. His heir was his daughter Margaret [aged 2 1/2 in 1321 and aged 24 in 1343],[10] so he probably had no surviving sons, contrary to what the pedigree, Burke, and various secondary and N-ary sources claim. He seems to have had a brother named Stephen who jointly held the land in Preston, Holderness. Margaret married Robert de Wasingdon or Watingedon. A William and Nicholas Haukyn are mentioned as sons of Andrew who transferred land to Robert Ingram of Preston,[11] but since Margaret was the heir, they must have predeceased their father. Stephen Haukyn is mentioned as a chapman in the same record. When Stephen died in 1350, Margaret was his heir to his 6/100 part of a knight's fee as well.[12]

!Source: WikiTree Osbert Hawkins [abt. 1393 - 1425] https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hawkins-229

Born about 1393 [uncertain] in Faversham, Kent, England

Died 1425 at about age 32 in Nash, Buckinghamshire, England

Biography

Note that some sites [e.g. http://en.rodovid.org/wk/Special:Tree/346755] have invented a chain of intermediate Osbert Hawkins to account for the gap between the real Osbert de Hawking and "Andrew Hawkins of Nash Court”] who was really Andrew Haukyn of Preston and never had anything to do with Nash Court], but these do not appear to be based on any real sources.