How can Johanna Brundage (b 1697) mother be Hanna (b 1640)

Question

If Johanna Brundage is born in 1697, then Hanna Brundage (b 1640) would be 57 yrs old when she gave birth.  Lineage society is not accepting this.  I am trying to establish the correct lineage.  I think Joahaan Brundage is daughter of John Brundage III and wife Johanna Brock.  Does anyone else have any ideas or information?

Comments

I am overdosing on Johannas and Hannahs!

I would have to go over all the sources again.  However, here is my try at this question:  John Brundage (Brundage-59), b. 1634 and Hannah Hunt (Hunt-1024), b. 2/12/1641 have a child named Johanna Brundage Husted (Brundage-108), b. 1697.  Johanna Brundage Husted married David Husted (Husted-25), b. 1695.

I show 2 daughters, of John Brundage (Brundage 59), b. 1634 and Hannah Hunt (Hunt-1024), b. 1641, and they are:  Hannah Brundage Husted (Brundage-108), b. 1685 and Johanna Brundage (Brundage-107), mentioned above, b. 1697.  I think that Hannah and Joannah are the same person.   If Hannah is the same as Johanna, then this means that Hannah is younger, abt. 44 years old.  I would have to spend more time with the records for Hannah and Johanna to see if they should be merged.

John and Hannah Hunt had a child named John (Brundage-769), b. 1664, who married Johanna Brock Brundage (Brock-436), b. 1642..  They had three kids, John, Joseph, and Johnathan.  I am surprised at the age difference between John and Johanna Brock.

---

John Brondig/Brundage and Hannah Hunt had the following children according to Perry Streeter, as follows:  John, Daniel, Ruth, Joshua, Joseph, Mary, and Hannah.  See:  John Brundish (Brundage) of Wethersfield, CT and The Colonial Ancestry by Perry Streeter - www.perrystreeter.com/brundage.pdf

---

It is probably very common for two profiles to be established, one for Hannah, and the other for Johanna.  Perry Streeter says that the date of birth for Hannah is 1677?  Note the question mark.  You can cross this with the following:  From Bulkeley to Bulkley to Buckley The Ancestors and Descendants of Moses Bulkley (1727-1812) by Thomas Taylor, Pub. 2008, Chapter: The Brundidge Family Connection.

Answer 1

I don't see how her parents could be John Brundage Jr and Hannah (Hunt) Brundage, the ones currently attached. Johanna wife of David Husted was likely born about 1697.  Hannah Brundage is named in her father's 1697 will, so he could still be her father.  But Hannah Hunt would be far too old at 57 to be her mother. 

Here's why.

Miller's Lyon Memorial has David Husted (b. 1695) marrying Johanna Brundage (no parents listed) on May 19, 1718 (no source provided). He provides a list of kids born 1719-1739. 

If Johanna/Hannah was born in 1685, she'd be 33 when she married, then would go on to have twelve children, becoming a mother for the last time at 54.  So I think the 1697 DOB should stand and the parents should be disconnected.

There's a self-published genealogy which has Hannah Brundage born 1685 as wife of David Husted but it cites no sources, so I'm not seeing we could use it as evidence.

There is now a duplicate profile for Hannah Brundage born in 1685.  I think she should remain as their daughter but disconnected from the Husteds with a note on the conflicting sources out there. I think these women were conflated at some point but the dates can't be resolved. 

Comments

I had Emily when I was 46 - so it is possible

---

Good analysis.

Answer 2

Thanks for pointing out this discrepancy (-: Can you please help by adding the right information with sources in the comments box so the profile manager can see it.  Thanks !

Comments

I can not find any source to document my thoery that Johanna Brundage's parents are John III and Johanna Brock.  Just only that there was a family tree on the internet, but the owner does not response to my eMails.

If anyone has information, it would be greatly appriciated since I am trying to prove for a Lineage Society.  Johanna b 1697 who married David Hustead as daughter of John III bo 24 May 1667 and wife Johanna Brock (or Brooks) b abt 1665.  John III is son of John "Old Stout John" Brundage b abt 1635 and his wife Hannah Hunt.

Only find information in

Hist. & Gen Families of Old Fairfield p 108 – list will of John Brundish dau Hannah Brundage

_{Thomas William Brundage, A Brundage Family Genealogy (1989); p2-2;}

_{Lyle Keith Williams, The Williams Families of New Jersey (Decorah, Iowa: Anundsen Publ. Co., 1998), pp278-9.}

 

---

John Brundage, b. 1634 was known as "Stout Old John."  He married Hannah Hunt, b. 2/12/1641.  They had a child named John, b. 1664, and he married Johanna Brock Brundage, b. 4/12/1642,  However, I think there is a problem with Johanna Brock Brundage's birthdate.  I would bet it is closer to her husband's (John's) birth date, which is 1664.

John Brundage, who married Johanna Brock Brundage, had a sister named Johanna or Hannah, who married a Husted, and whose birth date is in question.

---

Perry Streeter says that the children of John Brundage (The child of Stout Old John.) married Johannah Bush or Brock, and that she was born 4/12/1671 at Wethersfield CT.  The children of John and Johanna are as follows:  John, Joseph, Jonathan, David, Joshua, and Jacob.  See:  John Brundish (Brundage) of Wethersfield, CT and The Colonial Ancestry by Perry Streeter - www.perrystreeter.com/brundage.pdf

---

Perry Streeter does not say that Hannah's (The wife of Strout Old John, b. 1635) last name is Hunt.  He says:  "Hannah_________."  See page 13 of The Colonial Ancestry.  John Brundish (Brundage) of Wethersfield, CT and The Colonial Ancestry by Perry Streeter - www.perrystreeter.com/brundage.pdf

---

According to From Bulkeley to Bulkley to Buckley The Ancestors and Descendants of Moses Bulkley (1727-1812) by Thomas Taylor, Pub. 2008, Chapter: The Brundidge Family Connection:  Generation No. 3:  6.  John Brundage (John Brundish, Thomas) was born Bet. 1633-1635 in Salem or Watertown, CT, and died before October 2, 1697 in Rye, New York.  He married Hannah Hunt, daughter of William Hunt and Elizabeth Best.  She was born 2/12/1640/41 in Concord, MA.  One child was 16 viii.  Hannah Brundage, born 1685.  She married David Husted; born 1685; died 1776

---

According to Perry Streeter said the following about the land investments of  John Brondig/Brundage, b. 1635 (Stout Old John):  "One of the thirteen original proprietors of Rye; Oath of Allegiance to King Charles II on 7/22/1662 and again on 1/26/1663; purchaser of Manussing Island on 4/28/1663; owned land in the Poningoe Neck purchase; Rye Town Clerk from 1662 until death; Deputy to the Connecticut General Court in 1677 and 1681; purchased land in Rye on 8/28/1687 by Thomas Merritt and others; granted land patents in White Plains in 1694 and in North Castle in 1696; estate inventoried 10/2//1697; mentioned in John Winthrop's journal as age 30 in 1666.  About John's, b. 1635, son Daniel, Perry has a long paragraph about Daniel's land investments in White Plains and Perry mentions the "Bondage Patent."  See: John Brundish (Brundage) of Wethersfield, CT and The Colonial Ancestry by Perry Streeter - www.perrystreeter.com/brundage.pdf.  (Page 17 of The Colonial Ancestry is the section you want to look at.)

Answer 3

Having adopted the profile of Johanna Brundage Husted I think the matter of Hannah Hunt as mother (and wife of John) needs to be revisited. Some of this follows on the 21 Apr 2018 comment of Heather Husted above in this thread.

1/ The maiden surname Hunt appears solely based upon https://archive.org/details/concordmassachus00conc/page/2 which is the sole citation on Hannah's profile. (see page 2 which should come up with the link)

2/ The date of the marriage as 1660 and that "Hannah Hunt" married John Brundage Jr also has a sole citation: "The Washington Ancestry", Vol. 3, by Charles Arthur Hoppin, 1932, page 544. Follow the link and look at pages 548-549. Nowhere do I see that this citation gives any year of marriage and it very clearly states John's wife is Hannah ___________ (Hannah unknown).

Hannah Hunt is a documented person but she appears not to be documented as the wife of John Brundage Jr whose wife is probably Hannah _____________.  I am researching for additional information at this time. Does anyone have any primary source documentation or secondary source with primary source citations for the marriage, marriage date, or that Hannah Hunt is the Hannah that married John Brundage Jr. If not, I think we have to make the wife of John Brundage and mother of Johanna to be Hannah ___Unknown___. Leave Hannah Hunt as the daughter of her attached parents (just not wife of John Jr and mother of his childen) while trying to find where she fits in the puzzle other than as wife of John Jr (see notes from R Adams below in thread).

Comments

I found a book on Ancestry.com called New England Marriages Prior to 1700 by Clarence Almon Torrey (Baltimore: Gene. Pub. Co., Inc., 1985).  Page 111 lists Brundish, John (1635/6-1697) & Hannah ? [no last name]; ca 1600-/5?; Fairfield/Rye, NY.

---

Thanks, Virginia. Yes, the version of Torrey that Ancestry has lists no maiden name. I need to look at the other version at American Ancestors and see if in that one Torrey is listing the sources for his information...I'm thinking it is probably Hoppin but need to check. I put another citation on Hannah's profile I found in one of Jacobus later works where he also has no surname for her.

---

I've been reviewing some of the sources on the Brundage FreeSpace page and so far not seeing a clear last name for Hannah wife of John Jr, but i am seeing some things suggesting that the Brundages and Hunts are allied families around this time and place. Is there a way to just code her last name as uncertain, rather than unknown?

I was noticing that Hanna's son Daniel and his son Benjamin were involved in land and mill dealings with Samuel Hunt  at the "Brundage Patent" in White Plains: 

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=wu.89066154568;view=1up;seq=39 page 35

The long NYGBR passage on John Brundage Jr's profile 

(https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Brundage-59)   

tells more about this Brundage Patent and there is Samuel Hunt again. Maybe tracing him could lead to Hanna's place in the Hunt universe, if that is where she is from . She could be Samuel Hunt's Aunt.

 ("The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record", volume 49, by Peter Henry Greene, et al., (pages 290-294) )

As I read it feels like whereever the Brundages are the Hunts are not far away, and I know that does not prove Hanna is a Hunt, but I think we all should look a bit deeper to learn why she is believed to be a Hunt. 

---

Thanks, R. Still researching this and your notes help. I do believe there is a Hannah Hunt.

But given that no major researchers have said Hannah wife of John Jr is Hannah Hunt and there is no documentation for that (and we have the age question since the birth of Hannah Hunt is documented) I think the wife Hannah of John Jr is unlikely to be Hannah Hunt, just Hannah ____________.

It would be nice to see if we can place Hannah Hunt in the right context. I haven't looked at just the Hunt family with that in mind. Could you do some looking into that.

While I don't think we want to do anything just yet, I'm leaning toward suggesting we detach Hannah Hunt as wife/mother leaving her attached to her parents/known family upstream. Create (or find a vacant) Hannah ____________ as wife of John Jr to also be attached as mother of the children. There's a certain, though limited, number of valid references for a Hannah __________ wife of John Jr.

A couple of other people have mentioned wife of John Jr is a Hannah Brock. Yesterday I saw something I have to find again that I believe is the origin of that theory that is seen at Ancestry (etc). It looked to me like making Hannah Brock the wife of John Jr was a misread of a somewhat clumsily worded discussion where she is mentioned briefly. But I need to find and review that again. Has anyone else seen that reference and recall what it is?

---

I've been rereading the linked sources off the Brundage FreeSpace starting top to bottom and am about 3/4 through.

I will definitely keep scanning for references to the Hunt family in case there is a backdoor way to show a Hannah Hunt married a John Brundage Jr.. I'm thinking if (if!) she were traceable as aunt of Samuel Hunt who had business dealings with the Brundages of that time and place, then possibly her father could be determined. A source like her mother or father's Will that says "to my daughter Hannah Brundage I leave a feather bed." could be almost as good as a marriage record, Something like that.

If you in the end you decide to detach her , I hope  you will include a clear note about it like: "You will often find Hannah Unknown listed as Hannah Hunt, but since that  is unproven everyone should keep an eye out for actual proof of her parentage such as a marriage record, a Will mentioning surname and married name, a death record mentioning both, or a mitochondria DNA test with supporting proven charts linking her to a mother who married a Hunt of the proper time and place "

That would sort of prompt people to think of this in terms of a reasonable standard of proof, rather than thinking she is a Hunt because everyone thinks she is one which is unreasonable, but a very common type of assuming we humans do.

A side note, would this time and place be considered "New Netherlands"? If so maybe someone who grasps New Netherlands records can weigh in. I bet some of the local records got burnt up during the later war of the Revolution, White Plains being a hot spot.

One last overall context idea...the three families that I am tracing through this time and place (Hunt, Drew, Brundage)  all show a demographic trend which starts in Connecticut, moves into what we now call New York City, then later generations dispersing west. It's a big wave with lots of land transactions,  so possibly following Land Patent and land exchange records can help.

It was very exciting to learn there was a Brundage Land Patent at White Plains with mills later built on it. Vexingly the women are typically not named in these critical deals!

---

R, you make me laugh. Vexingly the women are typically not named in these critical deals! You forgot to add "and they made at least half of all the tough decisions, swaddled the kids and cooked the meals."  At least that's what I observe.

It is supposed to be good practice at WT that anytime a commonly seen connection like Hannah Hunt as wife of John Brundage Jr is changed that this be addressed on the profile along with why a change is made and a link to the former linked profile. It's just good practice and hopefully prevents the reintroduction of wrong of highly suspicious information. This doesn't always get done but I think it is a must.

---

Perhaps I was trying to write that "Vexing women are typically critical to any deal..."  or " How vexing that women were not allowed to vote or  own property , but many a dowery was sweetened by a critical gift of land from man to man" sometime the words gets all mixed up on this computer.

Speaking of our favorite vexing woman, I think I see why everyone believes Hannah is a Hunt....it possibly goes back to the  "From Bulkeley to Bulkley to Buckley..." book!

 But then the question becomes why did the author, Thomas Taylor 100% believe that is her name. 

Did he see a source? I can 't really see his sources, because this google book preview is incomplete and the computer says the nearest free complete version is at the University of Madison....on the shelf. 

This author Thomas Taylor may be an alive author, possibly trackable?

Maybe we have a Brundage friend who owns the Buckeley book and can take a peek to see why Thomas Taylor has confidence she is a Hunt?  

https://books.google.com/books?id=1dCMAAAAQBAJ&q=jonathan+brundage#v=snippet&q=hannah%20hunt&f=false

---

$8 for the e-book and I won't eat lunch out the next time I want to. I'll get it tomorrow and see what he has to say. Too tired for more reading this evening. I'll sleep with crossed fingers for a verifiable answer Taylor's book.

Thanks for finding that. Would be amazing if her name is Hannah Hunt just not the Hannah Hunt born 1641 (if she is that Hannah Hunt then she's like my great aunt who had her last big surprise after the age of 50 - his name is Elvin).

---

Got the Taylor book. It has an extensive Bibliography and long section of footnotes but where his info on John Brundage and Hannah Hunt comes from is not stated. [Edit: removed my own confusion.]

---

Strike the last post above, confused myself.

While I can't decipher what sources Taylor used for the Brundage section, he gives "Johanna's" name as simply "Hannah" Brundage born 1685 who married David Husted and died 1776.

Taylor's dates for children of John Brundage Jr and Hannah Hunt:

John b 1664

Thomas - no date

Joseph b 1667

Ruth b 1672

Daniel -1675

Joshua - 1680

Mary - 1683

Hannah - 1685

The 1685 makes a considerable difference in this vs the 1697 normally seen. Mother (with birth date 12 Feb 1641) would have been 44 at birth instead of 56. 44 is plausible.

I will have to see if I can figure out what the sources Taylor is using. This section of the book is not footnoted.

---

He had great footnotes elsewhere on the preview page and so sad that there are none here where we need them!

Answer 4

T Stanton is really on to something, but I have a little twist to add.   

Theory Time!!! 

Our problem is not Johanna, but a matter of an incorrect Hannah linked in matrimony to John Brundage Jr. leading to wrong birthdates for the mother of Johanna.

The problem profile: 

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hunt-1024  

Probably John Brundage Jr.'s wife was a Hannah Hunt, just not  Hannah Hunt from Middlesex county whose entire family lived and died in that area.

So I agree with T Stanton that this Hannah Hunt of Middlesex should stay with her Middlesex family,  get an annulment of her improper marriage to Mr. Brundage of White Plains. But he keeps the kids and she keeps her siblings and parents. She gets to keep the current wikiprofile number.  The real mom gets to be Hannah Unknown until we know for sure who she is. 

 And that resolves the troublesome problem that started this whole question which was how could Hannah have Johanna at 57 years of age. The real Hannah was probably a lot younger.

I bet, but can't yet prove, Mr. John Brundage Jr. of White Plains married one of the Hunts from nearby West Farms or Rye . I bet, but cannot yet prove, that she is some relation to Samuel Hunt who had land dealings with Daniel Brondage, Hannah's son. Samuel is thought to have six sisters! More about him at : https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hunt-4815

Comments

Here's a later Hannah Hunt born same place with birth year that could fit with births of first few children of John as they are all marked born "about" rather than having exact DOB. She is not in WikiTree.

Name	Hannah HUNT
Birth	1763
Location	Concord, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States
Original Text	Hannah Hunt ye Davghter of John Hunt & Hannah his wife was Born Sep tember 13 :1763
Town Info	Concord
Volume Name	Concord - V1
Page	216

Massachusetts: Vital Records, 1621-1850 (Online Database: AmericanAncestors.org, New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2001-2016).

https://www.americanancestors.org/DB190/rd/7685/216/142164547

There is another Hannah Hunt born Concord 1681 to Nehemiah but that's too late for the children of John.

Thoughts? Looking at Taylor book next.

Here's one in WikiTree not attached to parents or offspring in Westchester in right year span if she is real person: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hunt-1071   She was previously attached as daughter of Thomas Hunt-1079 but removed by Mags Gaulden (one of the Arborists). Can ask Mags more about this if we want to explore this one.

---

See thread under the Answer above this one. Taylor states "Johanna" is named "Hannah" and born 1685 rather than 1697. Same person as he has her married to David Husted.

---

Now I am really crying...............

The link for this unattached Hunts Point Westchester Hannah did not come through right, probably due to spaces on the end of the link, but she is there at this address:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hunt-1071  

Sadly this Hannah is too modern, born around the time of the Revolution, 100 years too late. I can't see the paid subscriber links to know anything about her, but her birth year is not in sync with John Brundage Jr.'s family.

I have been finding all sorts of things in the Abstracted Wills of Early Westchester County, everything but what we are looking for!

---

Egads, my brain read 17__ as 16__. Sorry. Could have solved the entire issue. Going to sift through Taylor's bibliography and other notes today (tomorrow) and see if I can ascertain his sources on the Brundage section.

---

We all do this same math trick sometimes.

Hey, found out that on page 171 of the NYGBR, vol 49 source there is a MAP of where the mill is and the Patents and owners are noted!!!

And old White Plains of that time is probably not where present White Plains is which is sort of bizarre when comparing to modern maps. 

https://books.google.com/books?id=EtgUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA293&lpg=PA293&dq=samuel+hunt+white+plains+mill&source=bl&ots=IIcQHX9RuW&sig=ACfU3U1vdqbgynXE2KlLbgsRcdNEQfjhXQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjgt4feiqnhAhWSvp4KHasZChQQ6AEwAXoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=samuel%20hunt%20white%20plains%20mill&f=false

p.s. Tracy who manages Samuel Hunt's profile does not know his sisters names....but the Will mentions six sisters, so maybe they will pop up somewhere. I can't find Cow Neck records for Hunt family though.