Alice Brock

? – 1692

✓ Validated against records · 2026-07-02

Alice enters the record already a wife. On 7 January 1651, on a near-empty page of the Belton register still kept in Latin, her daughter was baptised “Susanna Brocke, filia Georgii et Aliciæ” — Susanna, daughter of George and Alice. It is the first the parish books have of her: her wedding to George Brock, made somewhere in the later 1640s, was never registered at all, in the years when the war and the Commonwealth had broken the keeping of registers across England. Even her maiden name is unknown.

Five children were baptised at Belton in as many years — Susanna in 1651, George and William together in 1653, Francis in 1655, and Peter in 1656 — and it is through Francis, who settled at Haxey, that this line descends. Then, after Peter, her husband passes silently out of the record; no burial for him survives.

Alice lived on at Belton for the better part of four decades. On 6 December 1692 the register records the burial of “Alice Brock, vid.” — Alice Brock, widow — in all probability her: no other Alice Brock appears for miles around, and a long widowhood is just what her husband's vanishing would leave behind. From a marriage the record never caught, through a widowhood longer than the marriage itself, she carried the family that carried the line.

Composed from validated records · 2026-07-02

Family

Marriage

GBSpouseGeorge Brock1619–1656

Children

FBChild · the line continuesFrancis Brockemain line1655–1705

Life

Confirmed — anchored to a recordEstimated — inferred

1651

The baptism that names her

1651 at Belton

Bapt: Susanna Brocke, filia Georgii et Aliciæ — 7 January 1651.— Baptism of her daughter Susanna, Belton (1651)

Mum’s record Evidence

From Janet Brock’s research, cited — not yet re-verified at the image:

Baptism of her daughter Susanna, Belton (1651) — Belton register, January 1651 — Lincolnshire Archives. One of a handful of entries surviving from the Commonwealth years, still in Latin; it is the record that proves the marriage, no wedding having ever been registered. The full page and entry are shown on George's page. from Mum’s research

1692

Buried

1692 at Belton

Sepult: Alice Brock, vid. — the 6th of December, 1692.— Burial register, Belton (1692)

The record image is with the family — family sign-in

Read at the image record Evidence

Confirmed against the original record, read at the image:

Burial register, Belton (1692) — Belton register, December 1692 — Lincolnshire Archives; indexed in Lincolnshire Burials and the National Burial Index (findmypast). She is set down a widow. The only Alice Brock burial within twenty miles in the early 1690s — in all probability George's Alice, though the register gives no age or husband to prove it. read at the image

Our research

Who was Alice?

Open research · Belton, Isle of Axholme

Alice is the mother of the line — and almost everything about her before 1651 is a wall, for a well-understood reason: every record that would normally name her falls in the broken decades of the 1640s–50s.

What is proven

The marriage itself — though never registered — is proven by the January 1651 baptism of her daughter: “Susanna Brocke, filia Georgii et Aliciæ.” A church record naming them husband and wife.
Five children, Belton, 1651–1656.

The walls

Her maiden name. The wedding (~1646–1650) appears in no index: findmypast holds no George Brock marriage within fifty miles of Belton between 1643 and 1653 beyond his first (Hellinor Sealand, 1643), and FamilySearch has none for a spouse Alice anywhere in England, 1645–52. This is the Commonwealth registration gap doing exactly what it did — the record was very likely never made.
Her burial identification. The “Alice Brock, vid.” buried at Belton on 6 December 1692 is probable, not proven, as our Alice: the register gives no age or husband. But she is set down a widow — as George's wife would have been for over thirty years — and she is the only Alice Brock burial within twenty miles in the early 1690s (Lincolnshire Burials and the National Burial Index agree). The natural reading, held with the proper caution.
No will found online. A widow's will would name her people. FamilySearch's full-text search surfaces nothing for her, and findmypast indexes no probate; the Lincoln consistory court index at Lincolnshire Archives is the remaining offline avenue.