no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Nathan Bailey (1654 - 1716)

Nathan Bailey
Born in New Haven Colonymap
Son of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]
[sibling(s) unknown]
[spouse(s) unknown]
[children unknown]
Died at about age 62 in Westchester County, New York Colonymap
Profile last modified | Created 12 Jul 2011
This page has been accessed 1,500 times.
{{{image-caption}}}
Nathan Bailey belonged to the New Netherland Community 1614-1700.
Join: New Netherland Settlers Project
Discuss: new_netherland
The Birth Date is a rough estimate. See the text for details.

Contents

Confusion warning

Two different men were previously conflated in this profile, and the confusion could recur. One, the younger Nathan Bailey, profiled here, was the son of Nicholas and Margaret Bailey. He was born about 1660 in Westchester village, and married as his only wife Esther Caniff, daughter of Jeremiah, who outlived him and remarried in 1718. They removed from the borough town of Westchester a dozen miles north to Tarrytown and joined the old Dutch Church at Sleepy Hollow.

The other Nathan Bailey previously conflated here was the younger man's uncle, Nathan, born about 1642, likely in the New Haven Colony but possibly in England, to Nicholas Bayley and his wife. That other Nathan Bayley married, first, ______, perhaps Margaret _____ ( they had at least one child, Nathaniel, born perhaps 1675,) then secondly Mary Squire.

Biography

Nathan Bailey the younger was born after 1 Jan 1654. He is the son of Nicholas Bailey and his wife Margaret Alexander.

1680...bought land from Peregrine Turner. (The Settlers of the Beekman Patent, Page 290.)

Son of Nicholas "Judge" Bailey and Margaret Bailey (nee Anderson? Alexander?)

Nathan Bailey married Esther Canniff, perhaps 1690, judging from the (estimated) dates of the birth of their children.

Children

  1. Elizabeth Bailey b: circa 1691 in Westchester County, New York
  2. Sarah Bailey* b: circa 1693 in Westchester Co., NY
  3. Dinah Bailey b: circa 1694 in Westchester County, New York
  4. Anna Bailey b: circa 1695 in Westchester County, New York
  5. Margaret Bailey b: 1698 in Cortlandt Manor, Margrieta BP 2 Aug 1698 North Tarrytown. Wit Willem Sonderling and Margrietj2 Sonderling. [1]
  6. Mary as Marritje Bailey b: 1701 in Cortlandt Manor bp day and month not given 1701 North Tarrytown. Wit Wolffert Ecker and his wife Marritje. [2]
  7. Rachel Bailey b: 1703 in Cortlandt Manor bp 26 August 1703, spnsors Hendrick Van Lent and his wife Cornelia. [3]
  8. John Bailey b: 1706 in Cortlandt Manor bp 25 March 1706 North Tarrytown. Wit Jan Hermansz, Annitje Heyet. [4]
  9. Catherine Bailey
  10. Elizabeth Bailey b: 1711 in Cortlandt Manor, bp 5 June 1711 North Tarrytown recorded in Record Book of the Old Dutch Church of Sleepy Hollow; Members, Baptisms, and Marriages, Indices, Wit Jeremy Kenniff, and Elizabeth Bennitt. [5]


Sources

  1. https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/6961/45380_1020705384_1083-00064?pid=3178664
  2. https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/6961/45380_1020705384_1083-00064?pid=3178664
  3. https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/6961/42037_1521003239_0781-00020?pid=82435
  4. https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/6961/45380_1020705384_1083-00064?pid=3178664
  5. https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/6961/45380_1020705384_1083-00064?pid=3178664


  • The Settlers of Beekman Patent page 290




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

DNA
No known carriers of Nathan's ancestors' DNA have taken a DNA test. Have you taken a test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.


Comments: 5

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Bailey-42345 and Bailey-1507 appear to represent the same person because: Hopefully this will solve some problems with my tree
posted by [Living Bailey]
Bailey-42345 and Bailey-1507 do not represent the same person because: These two profiles are not even close in time. I have a hunch that there was a typo in one of the IDs.
posted by Ellen Smith
Bailey-29443 and Bailey-1507 do not represent the same person because: See notes in the profiles.
posted by Ellen Smith
Bailey-24714 and Bailey-1507 appear to represent the same person because: searched and he didn't come up so I added him.
posted by [Living Bale]
Bailey-16116 and Bailey-1507 appear to represent the same person because: Per the source trees, this is the same man, and will connect two of his wives. Thanks!
posted by Steven Mix