Person:John Kent (59)

There are few sources on the Kent family, and of those that are there, many seem to stop short of giving many details on this John Kent (e.g., NEHGR, p. 15:273), or in the one case that tries (Source:Briggs, Lloyd Vernon. Genealogies of the Different Families Bearing the Name of Kent in the United States), gets confused and ends up contradicting himself in the process. This is not surprising as there were three John Kents of similar age, and to make matters worse, they were all sons of different John Kents.

Given his birth in Newbury and based on the names of his children, it appears this John, the son of John Kent and Sarah Woodman, is the one who married Rebecca Somersby. The detailed reasoning follows.

Briggs (p. 235) says of John, the son of John Kent and Sarah Woodman: "One John Kent mar. Elizabeth ... at Charlestown; and had dau. Elizabeth b. Jan 8, 1697-8; another John Kent mar. Sarah Little Jan. 14, 1703" [given as "Jan. 14, 1702" in the vital records, so 14 Jan 1702/03].

The vital records of Charlestown do show a daughter Elizabeth born to John and Elizabeth Kent. However, on p. 17, Briggs gives this Elizabeth, b. Jan. 8, 1697-8, to the John Kent of Charlestown who married Sarah Smith, noting Elizabeth was baptized in Cambridge at the same time as their other children John and Hannah. So Briggs himself appears to have realized that the Charlestown record must have been an error by the town clerk, there was no Elizabeth who was wife of John Kent, and it should have said Sarah. Thus, he ruled out the one possibility himself. This John of Charlestown was the son of John Kent and Hannah Griswold or Grissell.

On p. 249, Briggs identifies the John Kent who married Sarah Little as the son of John Kent and Mary Hobbs, who he says died abt. 1703 and his widow married Bartholomew Thing 2 Apr 1712. In the vital records of Newbury, a death record identifies the John who d. 24 Mar 1703 as the son of "Sergt. John and Mary", which would be 2 months after the marriage (i.e., assuming 24 Mar 1702/03, or 14 months if 24 Mar 1703/04 assumed). The vital records also show that a widow Sarah Kent m. 1712 to Bartholomew Thing, so this identification appears confirmed by the vital records.

So Briggs appears to have removed both the possibilities he suggested for John, the son of John Kent and Sarah Woodman. But he gets confused, and on p. 254, Briggs describes the family of John Kent and Rebecca Somerby, identifying the father as the son of John Kent and Mary Hobbs. Both this John and the John on p. 249 are identified as the son of John who is the son of James. It cannot be the same person who married both, since the children of John and Rebecca stretch from 1697 to 1710, and so that could not be the John who married Sarah Little in 1702/03 and d. 1703. Since the death record seems to confirm the identification on p. 249, the identification on this page appears to be an error.

[Note that what information there is in the NEHGR article cited above agrees with the information given on p. 249, though in its limited scope, the article does not even mention the family of John Kent and Rebecca Somer[s]by, and so does not explicitly address the identification shown on p. 254. Also note that there is a minor complication regarding the birth date of the son of John Kent and Mary Hobbs. They had an earlier son name John b. 1665 who is recorded as dying two months later, also in 1665. Then the vital records of Newbury show two birth records of son John to "John, sr.", one on 16 Jul 1675, the other 13 Jul 1677. Both Briggs and NEHGR use the 1675 date, apparently assuming the 1677 date (which is labelled "S.dup.") was an error introduced in copying. Their assumption is followed below, as it doesn't really change any of the logic whether one assumes the 1677 record is an error, versus the alternate scenario that John b. 1675 died in infancy, and the surviving son John was b. 1677.]

Inspecting the names of the children of John Kent who married Rebecca Somer[s]by, the names seem to suggest his parents were John Kent and Sarah Woodman, particularly the use of Emma (since Richard, James, and John seem to be used in all branches of the Kent family). Emma was the wife of Richard Kent, the mother of the John Kent who married Sarah Woodman, and so presumably is the grandmother of the John Kent who married Rebecca Somser[s]by. Beyond this, the marriage to Rebecca must have occurred around 1695-6 (marriage record not found) whereas the marriage to Sarah Little was 1702/03, so one would expect the older John Kent to marry Rebecca (i.e., the son of John Kent and Sarah Woodman b. 1668, not the son of John Kent and Mary Hobbs b. 1675). The Newbury vital records identifies the husband of Sarah Little as John 4th (per the intention), which seems to confirm this assumption (It is a little difficult mapping all the John Kents exactly, but it appears that the John who married Mary Hobbs was John Sr. (or Sgt. John), John who married Sarah Woodman was John jr., John b. 1668 would be John 3d (though he is called John jr. in births of his children suggesting his father had died?), and John, b 1675 would presumably be John 4th. In any event, the fact that Sarah Little m. John 4th would seem to rule out the John b. 1668 as her husband.)

Briggs does not provide any wills for the various John Kents, and it is not known if this means they do not exist, as they would seem to be a likely avenue of further research. --Jrich 13:12, 20 July 2011 (EDT)

1. ↑ Newbury, Essex, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records of Newbury, Massachusetts, to the End of the Year 1849. (Salem, Mass.: The Essex Institute, 1911)
   1:259.

   Kent, John, s. John jr, Nov. 23, 1668.