Family Line Links: (WikiTree.com)(Ancestry.com)(FamilySearch.org)
I previously wrote about our Kent line's westward migration from New England in the early 1800s. In this post, I will be jumping back another 200 years to discuss what brought them to New England to begin with.
Our Kent family were Puritans who came to America from the town of Nayland, Suffolk, England in 1643/5. This was at the tail end of the Puritan Great Migration, which brought roughly 40,000 people to the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In fact, our Kent's came from a part of East Anglia, England that was a particular hotbed for the Puritan sentiment that was developing at this time- the Stour River Valley of south Suffolk and northeast Essex.
Map of the Stour River Valley showing the location of Nayland, Suffolk, England
Suffolk County within the UK, Essex lies just to its south
Historical Background
Nayland is located at a high point along the Stour River, a major river in East Anglia that forms the boundary between Suffolk and Essex. This elevated position allowed it to become an important route of safe passage within the surrounding river flood plain. In fact, the name Nayland is said to have meant Island. For this reason, by 1227, it had become an important market town, and was ruled by wealthy cloth merchants in Tudor times.
The River Stour in Nayland
St. James Church in Nayland, Suffolk, England, original structure built in 1402
Calvinists believed that the Roman Catholic Church had become corrupted by its wealth and idolatry and they opposed its elaborate, ritualistic, ceremonial rites. They saw the church as relying on these historical vestments for its authority, rather than on true adherence to the Bible's teachings. King Henry helpfully assisted with their desire for religious austerity due to his own entirely unrelated financial reasons. In 1536, his Dissolution of the Lesser Monasteries Act disbanded over 800 smaller monasteries, allowing him to confiscate their assets for his military campaigns. His son, Edward VI, actually did have some religious rather than political interests though. In 1549, he further enabled the breakaway from the former Roman Catholic rites by sanctioning the adoption of the Church of England's Book of Common Prayer, which helpfully provided a complete set of reformed rites for all religious occasions.
First page of the service for Confirmation in the revised 1552 Book of Common Prayer
The English Reformation was thrown into disarray in 1553 after King Edward died, and his devoutly Roman Catholic half-sister Queen Mary I took the throne. But Protestantism was officially restored in 1559 after Queen Mary died, and her Protestant half-sister Queen Elizabeth I came into power. With all the religious and political upheaval of the prior decades, however, Catholics and Protestants had become bitterly divided within England, and fear of a possible civil war led to the search for a middle ground. Queen Elizabeth tried to quell the disputes by both formalizing the Church of England as Reformed Protestant (a nod to the Calvinists), but also by allowing for more leeway in the interpretation of the Eucharist and the wearing of traditional priestly vestments (concessions to the Catholics). Unfortunately, it had limited success. Recusants and papists remained quietly loyal to their Roman Catholic traditions, while more zealous Calvinists (called Puritans) continued to push for more Reformation within the Church. Nevertheless, enough of a compromise was found that Queen Elizabeth did manage to hold off a civil war during her reign.
Queen Elizabeth died in 1603, after which her cousin King James VI of the Stuarts (who was also the King of Scotland and Ireland) became ruler, and his son, King Charles I, followed soon after in 1625. Unlike Queen Elizabeth, King Charles showed no desire to mollify his subjects regarding the heated religious and political tensions of the time. In the House of Stuart view, given that the King was the head of both church and state, an attack on the Church of England was equivalent to an attack on the throne itself. And King Charles believed strongly in enforcing his monarchal power of Divine Right. In 1629, he went so far as to use this divine authority to dissolve the "bothersome" English Parliament. This occurrence was particularly alarming to Puritan leaning Calvinists. King Charles had married a Roman Catholic princess named Henrietta Maria of France, and while he did not convert from Protestantism himself, he allowed for no religious leniency towards Puritans and other nonconformists. Without a Parliament to give weight to their concerns, Puritans had no political platform from which to push for further church reforms, and many began to lose hope.
Some nonconformists had already given up on reforming the Church of England by the time King Charles took the throne. These more extreme Puritans were called Separatists, and in 1620, a group of them hopped on the Mayflower and headed to Plymouth Colony (which is considered the beginning of the Puritan Great Migration). But after King Charles dissolved the Parliament in March 1629, many initially non-Separatist Puritans began to reconsider their options. One such man was John Winthrop, a wealthy landowner and lawyer who found himself released from his position on the Court in 1629 due to his Puritan leanings. He came from a Suffolk town called Edwardstone that was about 7 miles north of Nayland and 11 miles NW of Dedham in Essex Co,,- a place where vigorous clandestine religious dissention had already been occurring for some time.
Dedham Vale by John Constable (1828), showing Dedham Church in the background. It is considered one of the most beautiful areas of England.
After his court dismissal, Winthrop began to involve himself in efforts to establish another colony in the New World, just north of the Plymouth Colony that the Pilgrims had recently settled. They named it the Massachusetts Bay Colony after the Massachusett native peoples that inhabited the area. Settlement of this new colony would be an act of faith, given that 2 of the 4 colonies England had attempted to establish in the New World since 1580 had completely failed. Of the two that were successful, the Jamestown Colony lost over 80% of its inhabitants the first 3 years, while the Plymouth colony lost 50% of its inhabitants the first winter. Thankfully, Plymouth Colony found its footing the second year, with help from the Wampanoag native Americans who taught them how to plant the "three sisters". And when word of the colony's quick success reached the Puritans back in England in 1622, many more became willing to undertake the 2+ month long treacherous voyage.
.jpg)
The Mayflower at Sea by A. S. Burbank (1919)
The Kent Family Line
Back in Nayland, England where the Kent's still were, the King's dissolution of Parliament was causing an uproar. In one act of protest, five men of the Nayland parish refused to kneel for communion during a visit from the Archdeaconry of Sudbury in 1629 (Ref 1). One of those men was our ancestor John Kent (probably, see Note 1). It is not known how they were punished for this act of defiance, but over the next decade, most of them boarded ships and headed for the new colony. John Winthrop, who by this time had been elected Governer of Massachusetts, arranged for a fleet of 11 ships to leave for the Boston harbor that following year, beginning on 8 April 1630. It is estimated that between 700-1000 Puritans arrived on those first ships.
The Winthrop Fleet arrives in Boston Harbour - Jun 1630
Many men initially left their wives and young children back in England so that they could more safely prepare a homestead for them before their arrival. Such caution was just, as it is estimated that about a third of the 1630 Winthrop fleet settlers perished, either on the voyage over, or due to the hardships of the first year (Ref 4). The new settlers had planned to initially join the town of Salem, MA (established 1626), but upon their arrival, Winthrop found its inhabitants to be despondent after having just endured a brutal winter. In order to preserve his group's morale, he decided to relocate them to the settlement of Charlestown, MA, established just the year prior (Ref 5). Unfortunately, this new settlement had only one freshwater spring, and with a group so large, sickness soon became a problem. Thus, by Sept. of that same year, most of the Winthrop colonist packed up once again, and moved across Back Bay to a new area that they soon named Boston. As with the Pilgrims before them, the first winter was very hard, and by Feb. the colonist were starving. Resupply from England by way of the ship "Lion" arrived just in time. Thankfully, by the end of the second year, they too had found their footing and conditions began to improve.
Map showing the early settlements of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, including Salem (then called Naumkeag) which lies a bit NE of Boston.
As Puritan colonists continued to arrive, new settlements adjacent to Boston began to form, the first four being Dorchester, Roxbury, Watertown, and Newtowne (later reamed to Cambridge). Though most of these early settlements have now been annexed by Boston (along with Charlestown), at the time they were separate entities. During this period, it was not uncommon for new towns to begin by the willingness of dedicated members of a congregation to follow their preacher into the wilderness. Indeed, that was the ideal many were striving for (Ref 38). There, they could more freely establish a community centered on their particular set of Reformed Protestant teachings. Many of the settlers from Nayland, England initially settled in Watertown, MA (Ref 6), led by Minister George Philips, who had been the village vicar of Boxed, Essex, England (3 miles from Nayland) prior to emigrating in 1630. (Later, this town would become the residence of notable historical figure Paul Revere.)
View of Watertown in 1905 along the Charles River
The religious freedom these settlers sought came with contingencies though. Although a vast continent of land lay open before them, the reality was that it was already settled by indigenous peoples, even if their numbers had been severely diminished by the epidemic diseases the English brought. Additionally, the French had been trading with the Native Americans for over 100 years at this point, and they did not much welcome the complication of having a new trading partner thrown into the mix. Alliances and supply chains were tested, and by 1635, the situation was on the brink of war. This placed the new colonists in a very precarious defensive position, given that their initial settlements were all densely located coastal towns with nothing to their backs but the sea. Furthermore, these small settlements were already becoming crowded with the constant influx of new immigrants, and later arrivals began to feel pressured to quickly move on. For these reasons, in September 1635, it was decided that the residents of Watertown should begin to establish new inland settlements to act as a buffer for the more populated areas on the coast. These would become the settlements of Concord, Hartford, and Dedham (Ref 7, pp.4-5).
Indigenous tribal settlements of New England in the early 1630s
Despite these underlying reasons for the new settlement of Dedham, the settlers had other lofty ideals for the vision their new settlement would be founded upon. If there is anything that can be said to distinguish Dedham from others forming during that time period, it would probably be how particularly earnest they were to create a Utopian Community in which all its residents would be pledged to live out their daily lives in peaceful "Christian Love" (Ref 12). There was also the expectation that all residents of able means would pay taxes and contribute time to communal town projects and duties several days a month. Furthermore, one could not formally join the Church of Dedham unless its elders were convinced that a "spiritual conversion" by faith had taken place for the individual in question (Ref. 12, p.24). (Though given the deep religious convictions most Puritans had in leaving England to begin with, such conversions were by no means rare in the church's first twenty years (Ref. 12, pp.31-32)). Only those willing to commit to these covenants would be allowed Freeman (voting) status and granted land ownership in the new settlement.
1876 bird's eye view drawing of Dedham, MA showing the town church at the center
The story of our Kent line getting to Dedham is a bit different than what was typical of other Puritans. For starters, they arrived just after 1642, which is when the Great Puritan Migration is generally said to have ended. That was because of the Civil War that finally did break out back in England in 1641. The Puritans were reluctant Separatists, and the chance of victory under Oliver Cromwell gave them hope of being able to practice their faith in their homeland someday after all. Infact, some recent immigrants chose to return to England after the war started in order to fight for that possibility (Note 1b). Second, rather than arriving as a family group of devout parents with children in tow, they instead arrived as group of 3 brothers, at least 2 of whom were still minors. However, the details of why that was are a bit fuzzy...
Portrait of a Man and His Three Sons by Bartholomaeus Bruyn, 1530s
What we do know is that Joshua Kent was admitted as a Townsmen to Dedham on 2 May 1643 (Ref 14, p.96)(Note 0). He was granted permission to purchase land from Edward Colver, though it is not clear that he had the means to do so. Within about 5 months however, he had shown himself useful enough to the new settlement to be allotted land in the SW portion of the town (Note 6). Given the connection of Dedham's residents with both Watertown and Nayland, it seems probable that the Kent family was in some way acquainted with at least a few of its original residents (Note 3). Then, in late 1644, Joshua went back to England with a "testimonial from the church", (similar to what we would call a letter of recommendation today) and returned in 1645 with two of his younger brothers: John, Jr., who would have been about 12 at the time, and Joseph (b.1636, direct line), about 8 years old (Ref 20, p.37). Whether this recommendation was regarding an employment opportunity, the welfare of his brothers, or some other reason is unknown.
Allotment map of early Dedham, MA. Possible site of one of Joshua Kent's smaller holding marked in red, described as "lying betwene the Land of Mr John Allin past and John Luson in Rocke feild".
About a year later, in 1646, Joshua settled down with a young woman named Mary Cumbers. He was allowed to take the Freeman's Oath, meaning that he was now a member of the church and considered an adult who could vote in colony matters (Note 8). His initial role in the new settlement of Dedham appears rather humble. He was employed to beat the drum that called the townsmen to meetings, to keep the dogs out of the meeting house, to dig graves as needed, and to be the keeper of the town pound (Ref. 7, p.50)(Note 4). During a 1649 property valuation (Ref 14, p.161), his home value was at the lower end of the town's range. This may be partly due to a seemingly strange decision Joshua made in 1647. Apparently, he and his wife Mary, along with their new daughter Lydia, decided to return to England once again, for "reasons not well satisfiing his freinds or church heere." (Ref 20, p.37). Perhaps his friends were right, because they returned to Dedham for good about 18 months later. It definitely makes one wonder what was going on back in England though (Note 9).
Before town bells could be built, town drummers were used for town alerts like calls to meetings
This travel also begs the question- where were young John and Joseph Kent during this time?? The answer, in all likelihood, is that they were never living with Joshua in Dedham to begin with (Note 5). Infact, it was very common at that time to pay off the cost of a child's sea voyage by entering them into indentured servitude for a time (Ref 17). This had the added benefit of providing for their education and upbringing as well. Where might such an indentured servitude have occurred? A clue lies in the 1664 Will of Elizabeth Hardier of Braintree, Suffolk, MA (about 12 miles east of Dedham), in which she stated:
"I Giue unto John Kent & Joseph Kent, 40s apiece to bee paid within two yeares after my Decease. I Giue unto Joshua Kents three Daughters, 20s apiece, to bee paid to them when they are 18 yeares old, or at the Day of Marriage."(Ref 18)
We don't know a lot about this Elizabeth, or her husband Richard Hardier, unfortunately. She had only one child of her own, Lydia Hardier, who married to Martin Saunders, Jr., also of Braintree, but born in Sudbury, Suffolk, England. Sudbury is about 9 miles from Nayland and the Hardier and Saunders families seem to have been in association before their 1635 arrival. Martin was of a wealthy family, one that could afford many indentured servants, and perhaps the Hardiers were too. Often indentured servants were the children of relatives or friends, so the relationship between them was not always purely financial. Regardless, Elizabeth Hardier clearly had some type of special bond with the 3 brothers, and it seems possible that she is the one they lived with during their early years in America (Note 7).
Another piece of evidence suggesting that Joseph and John may have initially been indentured servants in Braintree lies in the relationship of our ancestor Joseph with a man named William Cahoone. William and Joseph were of similar age, but Wiliam came to America as a Scottish political prisoner about 5 years after Joseph, due to having participated in the Anglo-Scottish War of 1650-52. He was placed into indentured servitude at the Braintree forge (now part of Quincy). William and Joseph seem to have become friends in Braintree, because from that point on, whenever one of them moved to somewhere new, the other was not far behind. I am guessing the friendship had something to do with Joseph's early Baptist leanings too. Even more tellingly, when William tragically died in 1675 (more on that later), it was Joseph Kent who was later made his son Joseph Cahoon's legal guardian (possibly as an apprenticeship) (Ref 19). This surely contributed to the later marriage between Joseph Kent's foster son and his brother John's daughter Hannah Kent as well.
Regardless of where they were living during their early years in America, by 1659, all 3 brothers were living in Dedham, MA (Ref 15, p.7). Both Joseph and John seemed to have moved there in about 1658. This would have been about the time Joseph reached the age of adulthood and assumably completed his indenture. But while John stayed in Dedham with his brother Joshua until about 1671, Joseph seems to have moved on again by 1660, perhaps due to religious differences. He may have been in some way involved with the preparations being undertaken for the new settlement of Block Island that year. In August of 1660, twelve men from Braintree purchased Block Island (now New Shoreham, RI) from Govenor John Endicott of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They then spent the next 2 years preparing for the journey ahead, for at that point in the colony's history, the island was considered remote, and the cost and effort of getting there significant (Ref 21, Ref 22). Over the winter of 1660-61, two of the purchasers of Block Island, Samuel Deering and Simon Ray, paid for the construction of a shallop to transport passengers. William Cahoon was one of the indentured servants contracted to help with the boat's construction. And as the fates would have it, Simon Ray would soon become Joseph Kent's brother-in-law.
Joseph Kent was not one of the original 16 settlers who set off for the island in the spring of 1662 (Note 10), but by 1663 he seems to have joined them (Ref. 22, p.8). In those first few years, the situation on the island with the Manissean peoples was very tense. During the Pequot War of 1636-38, the expanding MA Bay Colony had demonstrated its military superiority to the native tribes of CT and RI in brutal ways. The resulting Treaty of Hartford had forced the surviving Pequot peoples from their homeland, but the other tribes were allowed to remain. This war was the native peoples first experience with European-style warfare, and an uneasy truce remained in effect after their defeat for close to 38 years. Within the Manisseans, this unease expressed itself though "threatening speeches" and "smaller abuses" flung towards the colonist. Apparently, things would get especially dicey if the tribe had recently traded for some "fire-water" (Ref. 22, pp.14-19). Despite superior military power, the new settlers saw that the Manissean people outnumbered them on their isolated island by about 20:1. Eventually though, the Block Island settlers decided to bring matters to a head by formally challenging them to a battle outside their fort (Ref. 21, pp.300-304). On the appointed day, Joseph Kent and the other original 16 settlers marched in a war-like fashion to the Manissean stronghold. Their challenge was accompanied by the powerful rhythms of a "single drum beaten for dear life by Mr. Kent" (Ref. 21, p.75) who was further described as being "a very active and sprightly man, and skilful (sic) in the business" (Ref. 22, p.19). (Perhaps he learned the instrument from his brother Joshua?) Having witnessed the Pequot's demise, the island's native population knew better than to respond in kind, and instead claimed that the vigorous beating of the drum had frightened them from fighting back. From that time forward, it was said that the "small abuses" ceased, and a "friendship" between settlers and Manissean's formed.
In the early years of the new settlement, Joseph Kent worked closely with fellow settlers James Sands and Thomas Terry to petition the General Assembly of Rhode Island on behalf of Block Islands inhabitants (Ref 21, pp.232-233). In May of 1664, they requested that the householders of the island be formally admitted as Freemen to the colony, which was granted (Ref 22, p.9). The new settlement was also granted the right to call public meetings for "regulation and safety", to appoint a town constable and clerk, and to "grant warrants, and try cases". James Sands and Thomas Terry were made Selectmen at this time (similar to members of a city council today). Joseph Kent was not chosen as the third selectman needed, assumably because he was still a young man and not of notable social or financial standing. Though clearly he had been well trained in his indenture if he was still seen as a fitting person to represent the settlers in their early legal affairs.
Joseph Kent's first child was born in about 1665 (Ref 27), suggesting the Joseph was married in about 1664. His wife, Susannah George, was the daughter of Peter George, and stepsister of Simon Ray, both original 16 Block Island settlers (Note 11). They lived on Block Island until about 1673, at which point they moved to the newly developing community of Swansea (Ref 19, p.116), which was at that point a part of Rhode Island. William Cahoon had moved to Swansea as well in about 1670, and in 1673 he was designated the town's brickmaker. Joseph and Susannah's first 3 children were born before leaving the island. However, their youngest child, Susannah, seems likely to have been an unexpected late arrival. She was born 15 years after their next youngest child, Joshua, when Susannah would have been 45 years old (Ref 28, p.19)!
The part of Swansea, MA that the Kent's lived in belongs to Barrington, RI now. Joseph Kent, Sr. was probably Baptist (or at least a Congregationalist with Baptist leanings), and neither Plymouth nor Massachusetts Bay Colony wanted anything to do with Baptists at that point. (While the Puritans may have come to New England to be religiously free, they were really only looking for freedom to practice their particular form of Reformed/Calvinist theology, not religious freedom for any belief system at all.) They wanted to get rid of them so much that in 1667 they allowed a group of them from Rehoboth/Seekonk, MA to have land in a part of the Sowams purchase. Anything to get them far enough away that they would no longer be able to negatively influence Plymouth Colony's inhabitants with their disturbing "heresies". And so, in about the spring 1670, a group of settlers moved far enough south to be just outside the boundary of Plymouth Colony, settling on the upper half of New Meadow Neck.
New Meadow Neck, also called Chacacus at that time, is now part of the Hampden Meadow's neighborhood of Barrington, RI.
Swansea had a novel system for admitting town residents (Ref 25, pp.157-161). It decided to admit townsmen to one of three ranks based on "ability, character, or influence". The higher the rank, the more land that would be allotted, effectively setting up a landed aristocracy as in England. Most people were understandably less than enthused. Joseph Kent, Sr. took issue with the system in 1677 (Ref. 25, p.160). Apparently, he had previously purchased the land of John Harding, who was a 3rd (lowest) rank inhabitant that had been ordered to leave the town in 1674 due to "not fulfilling the fundamental order of the town." The Town Counsil initially felt that this meant Joseph should be considered 3rd rank as well, however, Joseph felt he was entitled to a rank of 2nd tier. Although it took 4 years, the town eventually consented and granted him this status, along with the additional land it entitled. Before this resolution though, in 1675 he was found to have "Trespassed upon ye Lands of ye sd Town" by putting up a fence around the part he felt was due to him, and so the fence was torn down (Ref 25, p.174).
Present day view across the Barrington River from New Meadow Neck
During those four years of appeal, however, there were much more serious issues to contend with for the new Swansea settlement- namely, King Philip's War. I have previously written a small amount about this conflict here, regarding our Seaman line. But the war had both such immediate devastation, as well and long-term impacts for the colonies as a whole, that I plan to discuss it in more detail in a future post. For now, we will say that "King Phillip" was the English name given to the Paramount Chief (Sachem) of the Wampanoag peoples, who were the Native Americans present in the area of Plymouth Colony before the Pilgrims arrived. By the 1660s, a new generation of Colony born English were ready to expand into homesteads of their own. Gradual land encroachment by the colonists into Wampanoag territory eventually brought matters to a boil (Ref 29). Swansea's location, to the immediate north of King Phillip's seat of government on Mt. Hope, resulted in this new settlement being at the frontline of the war that broke out in 1675.
Between June 20-24th, 1675, Wampanoag warriors initiated a series of attacks on Swansea by raiding food stores, shooting cattle, and burning farms. New Meadows Neck settlers fled to the nearby garrisoned home of Rev. John Myles, but were ambushed along the way. Several people were severely wounded, and eventually two brave men, one of them William Cahoon, volunteered to try to run for help. They never made it- their mutilated bodies were instead discovered 2 days later, along the road near Palmer River Cemetery, by two military commissioners (Ref. 24, p.68). In the brutal 2 years that followed before the Native Americans were defeated, the initial upper New Meadows Neck settlement of Swansea was destroyed, and the settlers forced to relocate. No doubt, Joseph Kent was one of these, and it is unknown where he found refuge during this time- perhaps back in the Boston area with his brothers. There is no record of him having participated in the war itself.
After the war, the town center of Swansea shifted, instead becoming more developed in the Tyler's Point area, which was located at the southern tip of New Meadows Neck. Rev. Myles was convinced to return from Boston, where he had resided during the war, and a new church and home were built for him near where Tyler's Point Cemetry still stands today. (Note that at that time, Tyler's Point was often simply referred to as "The Place of Trade"). As the area grew, it spread east across the Palmer River to Brooks Pasture (now called Warren), and west across the Barrington River to Phebe's Neck. Eventually, in 1717, the western area was separated from Swansea and became the town of Barrington.
1776 map of New Meadow Neck (though labeled as Newberry Neck here). Arrow shows the possible general location of the Kent family homestead after King Phillip's War based on later plat maps. Note Miles Bridge in the upper right corner, to the left of which was the garrison property of Rev. John Myles before King Phillip's War.
Tyler's Point Cemetery, now surrounded by the Tyler's Point Marina
In 1680, Joseph Kent signed the Freeman's covenant for the settlement of Brook's Pasture (Ref 25, p.178)(Ref 31), though it does not seem likely that he ever actually moved there (Note 12). By about 1700, this area had become built up enough that the Baptist Church was moved across the river as well (Ref.25, pp.184-185), to an area now called North Swansea. However, this move was also due to a change in ministry that had occurred after the death of Rev. Myles in 1683. His post was taken up by Elder Samuel Luther. Apparently, Rev. Myles had been fairly liberal in his willingness to tolerate the Pedobaptist belief in infant baptism. Elder Luther was not so tolerant, and before long, a new Congregational denomination separated off west into what became Barrington. At least some of Joseph's children seems to have chosen the Barrington side in this split.
Present day New Meadows Neck, now part of Barrington, as well as the town of Warren, once called Brook's Pasture.
Joseph Kent's oldest son, Joseph Kent, Jr. (b.1665, direct line) chose a different path, though one that seems to have been influenced by his father. Although Joseph Kent, Sr. did not die until the age of 68, because of how late in life his youngest, Susannah, was born, she was still a 16-year-old minor when he passed in 1704. His friend, Deacon Samuel Newman of Rehoboth, was given guardianship over her (Ref 34, p.342). Back in 1696/7, both Deacon Samuel Newman and Joseph Kent, Sr. had been chosen as representatives to the General Court (Ref 33, p.131, Ref 23, p.58), and perhaps that how the families became acquainted (Note 13). And Deacon Samuel Newman was also the son of Rev. Samuel Newman of Rehoboth (ie the church the followers of Rev. John Myles had split away from at Swansea's 1667 founding). Deacon Newman must have had a profound effect on Joseph, because about a year after his court appointment, he and his wife joined the Newman Congregational Church of Rehoboth and his daughter, Susannah, was baptized there as well (Ref 36). Joseph Kent, Jr. was the only child of Joseph, Sr. who also joined the Newman Church though, and according to land records (Ref 35)(Note 14), he likely moved to Rehoboth, MA (now Rumford, MA) in about 1714.
The Newman Congregational Church today, built across the street from the original meeting house which was destroyed in 1676 during King Phillip's War.
Joseph Kent, Jr. and his wife Dorothy Brown (who was the granddaughter of Mayflower passengers John Howland and Elizabeth Tilley) had 8 children- 4 boys and 4 girls, of whom, their oldest son, Joseph Kent, III (b.1693), was our direct ancestor. In 1728, after his wife Dorothy died, he was married again in the Newman church to Mary Carpenter. Actually, it was a double wedding- his son Hezekiah married to Ruth Cooper on that same day. By the time Joseph Jr. passed in 1735, he had amassed considerable land holdings throughout the Bristol County area, and his children all received comfortable sums (Ref 34, p.342), in particular his oldest son Joseph III (Note 15). Almost all of Joesph Kent, Jr.'s children were married in the Newman Congregational Church, and were probably baptized there as well, though the records that far back have been lost.
"Here lies ye Body of Mr. Joseph Kent, Decd. March ye 20th 1734/5 in 70th Year if his Age."
Location of the famous "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" sermon given by Johnathan Edwards in Enfield, CT (about 13 miles west of Stafford) in 1741.
In 1802, Dr. Samuel Willard bought the property that contained the Stafford natural spring and built the Stafford Springs House to accommodate patrons of its "miracle water".
Joseph Kent, III married Bethia Thurston in 1721. They had 9 children, all of whom appear to have been baptized in the Newman church (Note 16). Three of them died in childhood, however, and one died as a young adult. Their 5th child, Jabez Kent (b.1732), was our direct ancestor. Despite the relative land wealth of his inheritance, Joseph Kent, III decided not to stay in Rehoboth (though the rest of his siblings did). Instead, in 1745, three years after their youngest was born, the family moved to Stafford, Tolland Co. (then a part of Hartford Co.), Connecticut (Ref 36, p.475). Given the Baptist leanings of our branch of the Kent line, it seems likely that the relocation was due, at least in part, to the split occurring within the Congregationalists at this period. This was during the time of the First Great Awakening in Britain and the Colonies, and many "Old Light" Congregationalists were embracing more liberal "New Light" Baptist principles. Inspired by the revivalist preaching of theologians like Johnathan Edwards, the Colony of Connecticut was at the forefront of these New Light sentiments.
After settling in Stafford, Tolland, CT, the Kent family finally remained in place for 3 generations, until moving westward again in the 1830s. The town was settled by Puritans in about 1718, and was initially known for its mineral rich spring water that had been used by the indigenous Nipmuc peoples for many years. Due to its widely pronounced curative properties, it soon became the site of the first health spa in Colonial America. Its resort town status was further enhanced in 1767 when a direct stagecoach route was established from Boston to Stafford (called Stafford Springs at the time) to make it more easily accessible. Future president John Adams visited the site himself in 1764. That same year, our ancestor Jabez Kent married Sarah Johnson, and they began a family of 9 children together, 7 of whom lived to adulthood. Their 3rd child, and oldest son, Elijah Kent (b.1769), was our direct ancestor.
We do not know very much about the Kent family during their time in Stafford, CT. They seem to have been well educated. At least two of Elijah Kent and Margaret Denison's sons were school masters, including our ancestor Orvin Kent (b.1808). Orvin's older brother, Merrill, is said to have been able to read in 7 different languages, as well as write in converse in 3 of them! In later years, Orvin described himself as of the Swedenborgian faith. The Kent family's move to Lagrange Co., IN in the 1830-40s was likely tied up in the Second Great Awakening that was occurring in America during this time of westward expansion. Clearly our Kent line has a long and dedicated history of seeking spiritual truth.
"Grace" by Eric Enstrom (abt. 1920)
References
1) Bartlett, J. G. "Gregory Stone Genealogy: Ancestry and Descendants of Deacon Gregory Stone of Cambridge, Mass. 1320-1917", p.43. The Stone Family Assoc. Boston, Mass, 1918. https://archive.org/details/fl-57081-tn-195526/page/42/mode/2up : 2024.2) Banks, C. E. "The Winthrop Fleet of 1630: An Account of the Vessels, the Voyage, the Passengers and their English Homes from Original Authorities", pp.52-53. Boston, Mass. : Houghton Mifflin company, 1930. https://archive.org/details/winthropfleetof100bank/page/50/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
3) Pope, C. H. "The pioneers of Massachusetts, a descriptive list, drawn from records of the colonies, towns and churches and other contemporaneous documents", p.267. Boston, Mass., 1900. https://archive.org/details/pioneersofmassac00pope/page/266/mode/2up?q=Kent&view=theater : 2024.
4) The Winthrop Society. 2022. Home | The Winthrop Society : 2024.
5) Mayo, L. S. "The Winthrop Family in America". Boston, Mass: Mass. Historical Soc., 1948. https://archive.org/details/winthropfamilyin00mayo/page/18/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
6) Banks, C. E. . "Topographical Dictionary of 2885 English Emigrants to New England 1620-1650", p.158. Brownell, Elijah Ellsworth : Philadelphia, PA, 1937. https://www.familysearch.org/library/books/viewer/282459/?offset=0#page=197&viewer=picture&o=info&n=0&q= : 2024.
7) Smith, F. "A history of Dedham, Massachusetts". Dedham, Mass. : Transcript Press, 1936. https://archive.org/details/historyofdedhamm00smit/page/5/mode/2up: 2024.
8) NEHGR. "Notes: Braintree Mass., Items.", Vol. 62, p.94, No. 188, 11th paper. New England Historical and Genealogical Register : Boston, Mass., 1874. https://archive.org/details/newenglandhisto19unkngoog/page/94/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
9) Savage, J. "A Genealogical Dictionary of The First Settlers of new England", Vol. 3, p.12. Boston, Mass. : Little, Brown & Co., 1861. https://www.familysearch.org/library/books/viewer/465140/?offset=&return=1#page=17&viewer=picture&o=info&n=0&q= : 2024.
10) Griswold, G. E. "The Griswold family, England-America : Edward of Windsor, Connecticut, Matthew of Lyme, Connecticut, Michael of Wethersfield, Connecticut" Vol. 2., pp.13-14. Middleboro, Mass. : Griswold Family Association of America, 1935. https://archive.org/details/griswoldfamilyen02gris/page/n23/mode/2up : 2024.
11) Suffolk Archives, West Suffolk branch: Surname Index. HA 541/1/67: "KENT, John, late of Nayland, now of Kinsington [Kersington], Middlesex, [England] party to deed - 1636, 1657. KENT, Alice of Nayland, party to deed - 1636." suffolkarchives.co.uk : 2024.
12) Lockridge, K. A. "A New England town : the first hundred years : Dedham, Massachusetts, 1636-1736". Norton : NY, 1984. https://archive.org/details/newenglandtown00lock/page/60/mode/2up : 2024.
13) Marr, J. S., & Cathey, J. T. (2010). "New Hypothesis for Cause of Epidemic among Native Americans, New England, 1616–1619". Emerging Infectious Diseases, 16(2), 281-286. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1602.090276 : 2024.
14) Hill, D. G. "The Early Records of the Town of Dedham, Massachusetts. 1636-1659.", Vol. 3. Printed Records of the Town : Dedham, Mass., 1892. https://archive.org/details/earlyrecordsofto03hill/page/34 : 2024.
15) Hill, D. G. "The Early Records of the Town of Dedham, Massachusetts. 1659-1673.", Vol. 4. Printed Records of the Town : Dedham, Mass., 1886. https://archive.org/details/earlyrecordsofto04dedhiala/earlyrecordsofto04dedhiala/page/4/mode/2up?q=Kent : 2024.
16) Cook, L. A. "History of Norfolk County Massachusetts, 1622-1918", Vol 1, pp.117-133. New York, NY : The S. J. Clarke Publishing Company, 1918. https://archive.org/details/historyofnorfolk01cook_0/page/116/mode/2up : 2024.
17) Rutyna, R. A. "Social Mobility in Puritan Massachusetts: A Case Study of Fifty Indentured Servants and Apprentices in Essex County entices in Essex County, 1630-1680", p.10. College of William & Mary : Williamsburg, VA, 1961. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3959&context=etd : 2024.
18) Abstracts of Early Wills. New England Historical and Genealogical Register 13:12. (1859).
19) Briggs, L. V. "Genealogies of the different families bearing the name of Kent in the United States, together with their possible English ancestry A.D. 1295-1898", p.115. Boston, MA : Rockwell & Churchill Press, 1898. https://archive.org/details/genealogiesofdif00byubrig/page/114/mode/2up : 2024.
20) Hill, D. G. "The Early Records of the Town of Dedham, Massachusetts. 1638-1845.", Vol. 2. Printed Records of the Town : Dedham, Mass., 1888. https://www.familysearch.org/library/books/viewer/125699/?offset=0#page=49&viewer=picture&o=info&n=0&q= : 2024.
22) Sheffield, W. P. "A Historical Sketch of Block Island". Newport, RI : Newport, J. P. Sanborn & Co., Printers, 1876. https://archive.org/details/historicalsketch00shef/page/n9/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
23) Wright, O. O. “History of Swansea, Massachusetts, 1667-1917". Town of Swansea : Swansea, Mass., 1917. https://archive.org/details/historyofswansea00wrig/page/n9/mode/2up : 2024.
24) Tilton, G. H. “A History of Rehoboth, Massachusetts; Its History for 275 Years, 1643-1918, in Which Is Incorporated the Vital Parts of the Original History of the Town”. Publ. by Author : Boston, Mass., 1918. https://archive.org/details/ahistoryrehobot00blisgoog/page/n8/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
24) Tilton, G. H. “A History of Rehoboth, Massachusetts; Its History for 275 Years, 1643-1918, in Which Is Incorporated the Vital Parts of the Original History of the Town”. Publ. by Author : Boston, Mass., 1918. https://archive.org/details/ahistoryrehobot00blisgoog/page/n8/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
25) Bicknell, T. W. “A History of Barrington, Rhode Island”. Providence, RI : Snow & Farnham, Printers, 1898. https://archive.org/details/historyofbarring00bick/page/n15/mode/2up : 2024.
26) King, H. M. “Rev. John Myles And The Founding of The First Baptist Church in Massachusetts : An Historical Address Delivered at The Dedication of a Monument in Barrington, Rhode Island (Formerly Swansea, Mass.) June 17, 1905. https://archive.org/details/revjohnmylesfo00king/page/n5/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
26) King, H. M. “Rev. John Myles And The Founding of The First Baptist Church in Massachusetts : An Historical Address Delivered at The Dedication of a Monument in Barrington, Rhode Island (Formerly Swansea, Mass.) June 17, 1905. https://archive.org/details/revjohnmylesfo00king/page/n5/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
27) "Web: Rhode Island, U.S., Historical Cemetery Commission Index, 1647-2008". Rhode Island Historical Cemetery Commission. https://rihistoriccemeteries.org/newgravedetails.aspx?ID=96438 : (accessed 12 May 2024). Joseph Kent burial (died on 20 Mar 1735) in NEWMAN CEMETERY, Rhode Island, USA. Born in 1666.
28) Rounds, H. L. P. “Vital Records of Swansea, Massachusetts to 1850". NEHGS, 1992.https://archive.org/details/vitalrecordsofsw00roun/page/480/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
29) Anderson, V. D. (1994). King Philip’s Herds: Indians, Colonists, and the Problem of Livestock in Early New England. The William and Mary Quarterly, 51(4), 601–624. https://doi.org/10.2307/2946921 : 2024.
30) Bowen, R. L. "Early Rehoboth, documented historical studies of families and events in this Plymouth colony township", Vol. 3, pp.47-48 & p.64. Rehoboth, Mass. : Rumford Press, 1945. https://archive.org/details/earlyrehobothdoc03bowe/page/48/mode/2up : 2024.
31) Fessenden, Gu. M. "The history of Warren, R.I., from the earliest times", Supplement, pp.60-62, p.75, pp.80-84, pp.116-118). Providence, RI : H. H. Brown, 1845. https://archive.org/details/historyofwarrenr00fess/page/62/mode/2up?view=theater : 2024.
32) Bowen, R. L. "Early Rehoboth, documented historical studies of families and events in this Plymouth colony township", p.168. Rehoboth, Mass. : Rumford Press, 1945. https://archive.org/details/earlyrehobothdoc03bowe/page/168/mode/2up : 2024.
33) Bliss Jr., L. "The history of Rehoboth, Bristol County, Massachusetts". Boston, Mass. : Boston, Otis, Broaders & Co., 1836. https://archive.org/details/historyofrehobot01blis/page/130/mode/2up : 2024.
34) Roser, S. E. "Mayflower Deeds and Probates: From the Files of George Ernest Bowman at the Massachusetts Society of Mayflower Descendants", p.342. Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publ. Co., Inc., 1994. "Mayflower Deeds and Probates, 1600-1850". https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/10706:3223 : 2024.
34) Roser, S. E. "Mayflower Deeds and Probates: From the Files of George Ernest Bowman at the Massachusetts Society of Mayflower Descendants", p.342. Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publ. Co., Inc., 1994. "Mayflower Deeds and Probates, 1600-1850". https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/10706:3223 : 2024.
35) "Massachusetts Land Records, 1620-1986," images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-L9Z7-8QBM?cc=2106411&wc=MCB5-8WG%3A361612901%2C362169901 : 22 May 2014), Bristol > Deed index (grantee) 1686-1795 vol 1-2 > image 344 of 494; county courthouses and offices, Massachusetts.
36) Arnold, J. N. "Vital record of Rhode Island : 1636-1850 : first series : births, marriages and deaths : a family register for the people", Vol. 9, pp.474-566. Internet Archive. (1891). https://archive.org/details/cu31924096442359/page/510/mode/2up : 2024.
37) Bicknell, T. W. "Sowams; with ancient records of Sowams and parts adjacent--illustrated", p.95. (1908). Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/sowamswithancien00bick/page/94/mode/2up : 2024.
38) Turner, J. G. "They knew they were pilgrims: Plymouth Colony and the Contest for American Liberty". Yale University Press, 2020. https://www.amazon.com/They-Knew-Were-Pilgrims-Plymouth/dp/0300225504 : 2024.
Notes
0) Up until 1752, England and the Colonies used the "Old Style" calendar system, in which the new year started on March 25th (Lady Day) rather than Jan 1st. In this system, what we would think of as 15 Jan 1651, they would write as 15 Jan 1650. Also, during the month of March, they wrote the year as 1650/1. So what we would write as 15 Mar 1651, they would write as 15 Mar 1650/1. From the 25th of March, the dates were written similarly through Dec. Additionally, sometimes they referred to dates as simply "the 2nd month of the year", by which we would mean Feb, but they meant April. When reading secondary sources, dates are not always adjusted correctly, and it can sometimes be hard to interpret what the original text might have said.
1) Many accounts list the names of John Kent's 3 sons who came to the MA Bay Colony between 1643-1645 but I have not yet seen any that list the father John himself. A ship manifest of the 1645 voyage lists the brothers as being from Nayland, Suffolk, England, and the Suffolk Archives does not find land records of any other Kents in Nayland during this time, so it seems reasonable to assume that this was their father. Of yet, I have found no baptism records to support this though. Many people list a John Kent and Alice Woodthorpe of Lamarsh, Essex as their parents and say they were married in Chilton, Suffolk, England in 1625. Lamarsh is only about 6 miles west of Nayland and Chilton only about 8 miles north, so this would make sense, but other than a baptism record for Alice, I have yet to find a primary source that verifies it. (Please contact me if you have one!)
1b) The deed record for John and Alice Kent of Nayland on Fen Street in the Suffolk Archives suggests that a mortgage transfer was made on 17 Jan 1636 between John Kent and Christopher Scarlett. That is very interesting because Christopher Scarlett was one of the other five men that refused to kneel back in 1629. Of those 5 men, only Christopher Scarlett is known to have stayed in England for certain (Ref 1). John Warren and John Firmyn probably both left in the initial Winthrop Fleet. A third man from Nayland, Gregory Stone, seems to have left for Watertown, MA in about 1635/6. It is possible that our John Kent did initially leave for America at the same time, but then chose to return when the Civil War began. I think this possibility would actually go a long way towards explaining why young Joshua was so willing to cross the ocean alone and also so easily taken in at the new Dedham settlement, despite having no real occupational skills or wealth to speak of. If the Kent family did initially come to Watertown in 1636, Joshua would have made the acquaintance of many of the future residents of Dedham during his early teenage years.
These same records indicate that John Kent was a Clothier who had moved to Kensington, Middlesex, England (now part of London) by 1657. His wife Alice had passed by then, and he was remarried to a widow named Ann Hull from Stoke by Nayland. Additionally, he seems to have been fined in 1642, which would correspond to the hard times that must have come if his first wife Alice did indeed die in 1641.
Sorting this out will have to be another installment. (If you do have primary records for any of these facts, please contact me. Thanks!)
2) The only primary birthdate source I have been able to find for any of the three brothers is for Joseph. He was a witness in a 19 May 1653 court case of Faxton vs. Wilson in Braintree, MA, in which his age was stated as "16 years or thereabouts" (Ref 8). This means he would have been born in about 1637 and he was the youngest known child. Thus, John Kent could not have left England before 1636.
3) In 1635/6, a large number of Puritan immigrants from the Stour River Valley of Suffolk/Essex, England made their way to Massachusetts, and many ended up in Watertown and/or Dedham. One possibility is Henry or Nicolas Phillips, who were likely related to the George Phillips from Boxed, Essex (near Nayland) that became the Pastor in Watertown. George Phillips was an outspoken voice for the Puritan cause in England before leaving in 1630, and the Kents would have likely been influenced by his sentiments. Another possibility is the family of Samuel Morse, also born in Boxed, Essex, England, though probably living in Redgrave, Suffolk, England around the time of his 1635 immigration. Philemon Dalton, a linen weaver in the town, is another possibility.
I should also mention here that some researchers say that our John Kent (b.1600) had a sister named Dorothy Kent (b. 1603) who married a John Browne. They are supposed to have come to America in about 1632 and settled in Watertown, MA. This Dorothy probably remarried later to a William Potter after her first husband died in 1636. This could be an alternate reason that Joshua decided to come over in 1643. Though I'm not sure why he would have gone to Dedham rather than Watertown nearer his aunt in that case. I haven't found much info to either support or refute this possibility. Unfortunately, John Browne is just about as common a name as you can get for that time period, so it's pretty hard to trace him from Watertown back to England. And the records that do exist list his wife as Dorothy, but don't give a last name, so it is tough to be sure.
4) Some researchers have previously assumed that by "pound" the authors meant money or tithes. But a much more likely explanation is the animal pens that colonial towns kept at this time for loose cows and the like. Pound keepers were paid when people retrieved their animals from the town pound. See the link above for more information.
5) The wording of the town record about this issue is "md ye sd Joshuah Kent having brought ov'r 2 of his brothers & placed them in ye country..." (Ref 20, p.37) which suggests that 1) Joshua possibly had other brothers/siblings as well, and 2) they were housed somewhere outside of Dedham.
6) The practice at this time was to receive small houselots within the village center, as well as larger farming lots within a common field. In Dedham, allotments were granted as 12 acres for married men and 8 acres for single men (Ref. 7, p.12). Before his marriage, Joshua Kent was granted 2 acres in the Rocky Field SW of town, and 6 acres of "upland where it may be found convenient" but there is no further clarification of where this second allotment was made.
7) Even more interesting is her connection to the Saunders family. And in Martin Saunder's 1706 will, he mentions the Kents again:
"I Give unto Mary Kent, forty shillings or a Sowe, at the choice of my Executor, to be paid within a year after the decease of my Loving wifeI Give unto Susannah Kent forty shillings or a Sowe, at the Liberty of my Executor, to be paid within a year after the Death of my wife."
Likely these were the younger 2 daughters of Joshua Kent, though there is evidence from a baptism record in Stoke-by-Nayland that John and Alice also had at least one daughter named Mary in 1636. Perhaps multiple children were sent to the New World as indentured servants after Alice died??
8) Usually, one had to be 21 years of age to take the Freeman's oath, but there were exceptions. Occasionally, if one was a member of the church and had contributed in some significant way to the welfare of the settlement, and/or had demonstrated maturity through property ownership and/or marriage, the oath was allowed earlier. If he was at least 21 years of age, he was born in 1625 or earlier. That would be a larger separation in age from his younger brothers than one might expect, but perhaps he was trying to help his father out with his youngest siblings after his mother died. It is also doubtful that he would have married before age 18, so even if allowed to take the oath early, a birth of 1625-1627 seems most likely.
9) The Dedham town record of Ref 20 went on to state that:
"...md ye said Joshuah Kent upon ye trobles arising againe in England & wares ther 1648 he returned wth his wife againe about ye 8m yt yeare" (ie Joshua Kent went to England again in about 1648, but upon troubles arising there as before, he once again returned with his wife.")And now for some wild speculation based on preliminary data. The more pieces of information I gather, the more sense I get of Joshua as a pious and earnest, but also still somewhat fickle lad in his early 20s. If his father is who I think he was, then he was a Clothier who likely helped to produce and arrange for the sale of cloth goods between London and Nayland. Unfortunately, the Suffolk Wool Towns were in severe economic decline at that time. Perhaps young Joshua, caught up in Puritan idealism, was also running away from expectations on him as the oldest son of a dying family business??? Or perhaps he and his father just did not get along very well. Or he found the atmosphere in England towards Puritans still too stifling. We will probably never know for certain.
The other sense I get of the 3 brothers is that while they were not wealthy themselves, they seem to have had a lot of connections with people who were, and those connections definitely helped them to get a leg up in the New World, particularly Joseph. Perhaps their father back in Nayland had been a Clothier for some of the wealthy families in the area and had good connections, though I did not find the Kents listed as among the wealthiest Clothiers of Suffolk or Essex themselves. Still, his property description in Nayland in 1636 was listed as "Messuage and dyehouse buildings, 1 messuage called Godings (alias Moline) and garden and 1 messuage anciently called Balls in Fen Street, Nayland, 1636", so he was not poor either.
10) Some accounts say this happened in 1661 instead, but a good description of the events necessary to undertake a new settlement was laid out in Ref. 21, p.19, and I am inclined to agree with his assessment of the timing. Of note, the future Block Islanders seem to have stayed in Taunton, MA from 1661-1662, while the land surveying was completed and final preparations were made. This would have been a much more convenient location than Braintree from which to make frequent trips to and from the island before permanent settlements could be undertaken.
11) There is no primary record for when this marriage occurred, though some secondary sources cite Rehoboth. Although Joseph and Susannah were likely both living on the island in 1664, the island did not obtain its first minister until 1700, and that one lasted only 2 years. Instead, the islanders continued holding services in one another's homes until a permanent Baptist minister was finally found in 1765! It was then that the town established the First Baptist Church, now known as Harbor Church. Without a minister in 1664, however, it is likely that Joseph and Susanna would have had to be married on the mainland. Furthermore, given their Baptist leaning sentiments, going to Rehoboth, where Rev. John Myles had arrived in 1663, would have made sense, and could also explain their later move to Swansea. It is also possible they could have gone to Newport, Warwick, Portsmouth, or Providence though, all of which were strongholds for the Baptist sentiments not allowed in the other colonies at that time.
12) The burial stones for Joseph's other two sons, Samuel and Joshua, are both in the Tyler's Point Cemetery, near where he is known to have owned land after the war. Joseph, Jr., on the other hand, is buried in the Newman Cemetery up in Rumford, RI, which is right next to the Rumford Cemetery. I am guessing that the Find-a-Grave profile for Joseph Sr. that discusses him possibly being buried in "the Old Rumsford Cemetery" comes from someone either mistaking his son's grave for his, or just assuming he was buried in the same place. In the Inventory of Estate taken for Joseph after his death in 1704, he is stated to be "of Swansea MA." (Ref 34, p.342). Thus, I think Joseph Kent, Sr. is likely buried in the Tyler's Point Cemetery as well. Unfortunately, most of the early markers in the Tyler's Point cemetery are at this point unreadable.
13) Also, in 1692, Samuel Newman, III of Rehoboth along with Joseph Kent, Jr. and his brother Samuel, were witnesses to a Rehoboth land transfer made after the death of Swansea resident John Viall in 1691 (Ref 32, p.168). Later their families would more formally intertwine when Deacon Newman's grandson Noah Newman (son of David Newman) married Joseph Kent, Jr.'s daughter, Dorothy Kent, in 1721.
14) Land record (Ref 35) show that Samuel and Joshua both purchased land in Swansea, MA shortly after their father's estate was settled in 1704. As the eldest, Joseph Jr. was probably living on the original New Meadow Neck homestead with his mother still. The earliest record of a Joseph Kent buying land in Rehoboth occurred in 1714, which is probably when he relocated. Perhaps this was when his mother Susannah (George) died. He was definitely living in Rehoboth by 1727 when his first wife Dorothy (Brown) died, as she was buried in the Newman Cemetery as well.
15) "Will of Joseph Kent of Rehoboth, MA...dated Mar 1734/5...to son Joseph Kent, the house in which he now dwells, all lands in Watchamoket neck [now East Providence], three acres of meadow in Mile Brook adjoining to Isaac Perrin's meadow, ten acres of land att ye north end of my homestead, five acres of meadow att ye south end which I bought of John Mason, a quarter parte of cedar swamp att Squanemaconk [probably Seekonk], twenty acres on ye east side of Squanamaconk and twenty pound right in Commonage in Rehoboth, he paying to my daughters twenty pounds each..."
16) There is a bit of confusion in the church records here actually, though the town clerk records appear to be correct. Jabez's baptism record lists his name as Joseph rather than Jabez (Ref. 36, p.510), and then doesn't list the second Joseph (IV) born to the family in 1737 (the first Joseph died in 1735 just before turning 13). I'm guessing this is a transcription error, given that it would not have made much sense for Joseph III and Bethia to have baptized all but one of their children, especially given he did not die as an infant. Also, all other records for Jabez confirm that his name was Jabez, not Joseph.
Kent Lineage
.png)
