Person:Augustine Walker (1)

Augustine Walker
b.Bef 1548
m. Bef 1573
  1. Dorothy Walker1573 -
  2. Elizabeth Walker1583 - 1673
  3. Ann WalkerEst 1585 -
  4. Mary WalkerEst 1587 -
  • HAugustine WalkerBef 1548 - 1614
  • WMary StringerBef 1577 - 1614
m. 27 Jun 1597
Facts and Events
Name Augustine Walker
Gender Male
Birth[2] Bef 1548 Estimate based on approximate date of marriage
Marriage Bef 1573 Estimate based on the baptism date of probable oldest child
to Unknown Unknown
Marriage 27 Jun 1597 Great Amwell, Hertfordshire, Englandto Mary Stringer
Burial[2] 18 Aug 1614 Great Amwell, Hertfordshire, England
References
  1.   Bartlett Society Newsletter
    January 2005.

    "The parish registers of Great Amwell in Hertfordshire show that a Richard Warren married an Elizabeth Walker on 14 April 1610. No baptisms of any children of this couple are recorded in the Great Amwell parish registers, but the will of Elizabeth's father, Augustine Walker, shows that Richard and Elizabeth (Walker) Warren had a family that fits very well with what is known of the family of the Mayflower passenger. Our ancestress, Mary Warren's birth, has been calculated as being in 1610 or 1611, since at her death on 27 March 1683, she was said to be "in her 73d yeare." This is an excellent fit with the marriage date of Richard and Elizabeth (Walker) Warren.

    The will of Augustine Walker of "much" Amwell was dated 19 April 1613. The three Warren children named in this will have the same names are are listed in the same order as the first three children known to be by immigrant Richard Warren. Since their parents were married in 1610 and they were named in their maternal grandfather's will in 1613, the dates of birth of these daughters can be stated reasonably accurately, and match very closely what is known of the births of the daughters of Richard Warren, the Mayflower passenger.

    Augustine Walker was buried at Great Amwell on 18 August 1614 as "Austen Walker of Amwell Streete an owld man". His widow Mary was buried at Great Amwell on 26 December of the same year, but she was evidently not the mother of Elizabeth (Walker) Warren. Augustine Walker and Mary Stringer were married in Great Amwell on 27 June 1597. Mary's will, dated 23 December 1614 and proved on 10 January 1614/15, does not name Augustine's children, but does refer to the "legacies of my husband Augustine Walker lately deceased."

    An ELizabeth, daughter of Augustine Walker, was baptized at Baldock, Herfordshire, approximately fifteen miles from Great Amwell, in September 1583. The children of Augustine Walker of Great Amwell mentioned in his will are: Elizabeth, wife of Richard Warren; Ann, wife of Thomas Holland; and Mary Johnson. No record of the baptisms of Ann or Mary was found in the Baldock parish registers. A Dorothy, daughter of Augustine Walker, baptized there in 1573, could be the Dorothy Walker who married Edward Grave at Great Amwell in 1595. If the Elizabeth Walker baptized at Baldock, then she would have been ninety years old by October 1673, which would fit with the age of "above 90 yeares" given for the age of immigrant Richard Warren's widow at the time of her death on 2 October 1673. There is nothing inconsistent with this identification, so far as is known."

  2. 2.0 2.1 The Marriage of Richard Warren of the Mayflower, in The American Genealogist (TAG). (Donald Lines Jacobus, et.al.)
    78:84.

    Augustine Walker was buried at Great Amwell on 18 August 1614 as "Austen Wallkar of Amwell Streete an owld man." [Citing Amwell Parish Register, p 94]

  3.   Some people think Augustine Walker was the son of John Walker and Katherine Bicknell because a son Augustine Walker was baptized to them in Southam, Warwick, England on 22 Feb 1564 ([1] IGI record from Southam parish registers). But Augustine Walker was buried in 1614 called an "owld man" and his daughter Elizabeth (who married Richard Warren as proved by Augustine's 1613 will TAG article) was baptized in 1583 which suggests he was probably born before 1560. These date mismatches and lack of evidence suggests this parentage is unlikely at best.