John Lock – Langtoft

John Lock of Langtoft

The surviving records relating to John Lock are relatively few, consisting primarily of the dates of his marriages, the baptisms of his children, and the records of his death and burial. Despite the limited evidence, these entries provide the foundation for reconstructing his life and raise several interesting questions about his origins.

The earliest confirmed reference to John appears in the parish registers of Langtoft, Lincolnshire, where he married Dorothy Roy on 27 October 1664. No earlier entry for either John or anyone bearing the surname Lock has been found in the Langtoft registers, suggesting that he was the first member of the family to settle in the parish. It is therefore likely that he arrived from elsewhere, either in connection with his marriage to Dorothy or in search of employment.

John and Dorothy’s first known child, John Lock, was baptised at Langtoft on 26 November 1665. Sadly, John junior died in infancy and was buried in 1670. The parish register also records the burial of “Dorothy wife of John Locke” on 28 May 1669.

Only a few months later, on 30 September 1669, John married Alice Tory, who became his second wife. Alice remained with him until her burial on 25 May 1678. Later that same year, on 14 November 1678, John married for a third time, taking Elizabeth Baines as his wife.

The Langtoft parish registers record that John Lock died on 7 May 1682 and was buried on 14 May 1682. His burial entry describes him as a labourer, the only occupation recorded for him in the surviving parish records. Apart from his marriages and burials, the only other significant reference to John is the baptism of his second known son, Alexander Lock.

John’s description as a labourer is particularly significant when considered alongside a long-standing family tradition. According to an account dating from 1686, Alexander Lock inherited a deed granting the right to drive cattle through Stamford. If such a deed genuinely existed, it is natural to assume that it had passed to Alexander from his father. However, this presents two difficulties. Firstly, John died in 1682, four years before the tradition places the inheritance. Secondly, there is no obvious explanation as to how a man described simply as a labourer would have acquired such a valuable privilege.

It is, of course, possible that the deed came to Alexander through another branch of the family or from a more distant relative, but at present there is no documentary evidence to support this theory. Consequently, the story must remain an interesting family tradition rather than an established historical fact.

Establishing John’s origins is equally problematic. As he married in 1664, it is reasonable to estimate that he was born around 1640–1645, assuming he was in his early twenties at the time of his marriage.

One possible candidate is Alexander Lock of Thurlby-by-Bourne, who married Rose Chessington in Stamford in 1654. The fact that John later named his second son Alexander may be more than coincidence and could suggest a family connection. Thurlby lies only a few miles from Langtoft, making it a plausible place of origin. If Alexander was indeed John’s father, he may have been entering into a second marriage in 1654, which would accommodate the estimated chronology.

Another possibility is the baptism of John Locke, son of Ralph and Repentance Locke, at Moulton, near Spalding, on 6 September 1629. Moulton is also within a reasonable distance of Langtoft and therefore cannot be discounted. The principal difficulty with this identification is that a John Locke married Elizabeth Collet at Moulton in 1655. While this does not completely eliminate the possibility that the two men were the same individual, accepting that conclusion would require John of Langtoft to have married four times rather than the three marriages documented in the Langtoft parish registers.

At present, none of the available evidence is sufficiently conclusive to identify John Lock’s place of origin with certainty. Until additional documentary evidence comes to light, his ancestry must remain unresolved. Nevertheless, the surviving parish records provide a valuable framework for understanding his life and offer several promising avenues for future research.