no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Joan (Bailey) Huntington (bef. 1622 - abt. 1670)

Joan (Johanna) "Joane" Huntington formerly Bailey aka Bayly
Born before in Bromham, Wiltshire, Englandmap
Ancestors ancestors
Daughter of and
Wife of — married about 1642 in Amesbury, Massachusettsmap [uncertain]
Descendants descendants
Died about after about age 47 in Amesbury, Essex, Massachusettsmap
Problems/Questions Profile manager: Harold Ward private message [send private message]
Profile last modified | Created 19 Jul 2012
This page has been accessed 1,239 times.

Biography

Flag of Wiltshire (adopted 2009)
Johanna (Bailey) Huntington was born in Wiltshire, England.

Joane Bayly was baptized in Bromham, Wiltshire, England 14 July 1622, daughter of John Bayly and Anne his wife of Chittow(n).[1]

She emigrated--possibly with father and brother John-- to New England where she married by 1642 William Huntington. She received a bequest from her father in his 1651 will.[2]

Sources

  1. Bromham Parish Register image 39 by subscription, Ancestry.com.
  2. Clifford L. Stott, "John1 Bayly of Bromham, Wiltshire, and Essex County, Massachusetts," The American Genealogist, 77 (2002):241-247; digital images by subscription, AmericanAncestors.

See also:





Is Johanna your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message the profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA
No known carriers of Johanna's DNA have taken a DNA test.

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 7

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
"by 1642" comes from Torrey's "New England Marriages Prior to 1700." Their first-born child was born in 1643.

What is the source for 18 July 1646? It doesn't make sense.

posted by S. Robinson
Married July 18 1646 Salisbury Essex mass
posted by Robert Bailey
What is the source for that? It would be a good idea to add it to the two profiles.
posted by S (Hill) Willson
edited by S (Hill) Willson
That doesn't quite make sense based on their first child apparently born in 1643.
posted by S (Hill) Willson
Bailey-6285 and Bailey-3007 appear to represent the same person because: same
posted by Philip Smith
Bailey-3008 and Bailey-3007 appear to represent the same person because: same
posted by Philip Smith
Bailey-7036 and Bailey-3008 appear to represent the same person because: same
posted by Philip Smith

B  >  Bailey  |  H  >  Huntington  >  Joan (Bailey) Huntington