John Heathfield


bur. 29/04/1710 Burwash, Sussex

Marriages/Partnerships

Jane Heathfeild
m. 30/09/1679
Eliz. Swain Heathfield, Sussex bur. 03/09/1702

Children

Elizabeth Heathfield
John Heathfeild
bap. 23/07/1680 Mary Heathfild bur. 05/02/1763
[View Descendants]
Note: Includes only children from certificates, baptism entries, or from census entries where the relationship is specified. For married women, please see their husband's entry for children from censuses.

Occupations

1707 yeoman

Also known as

Johannes Heathfield, John Heathfeild

Did You Know?

  • I had expected that the John Heathfield who married Elizabeth Bungar in 1679 was the son of John Heathfield and Elizabeth Mone who was baptised in March 1655/6. But his will of 1707 refers to his daughter Elizabeth Heathfield as 'Elizabeth Clifton'; it seems likely that she had married in 1685, so the son of John and Elizabeth was too young to be her father.
  • The way John Heathfield initially refers to Mary Heathfild in his will is puzzling - he refers to her as 'my daughter in Law Mary Cruttenden'. Mary's mother Elizabeth Bungar had been married previously, but it seems very unlikely that Mary was a product of that marriage - she was baptised as 'the daught' of John Heathfield by Eliz his wife' well over a year after the burial of Elizabeth's previous husband (and ten months after John and Elizabeth's marriage) and when she married Joseph Crottenden in 1701 it was as 'Mary Heathfild'.

Documentary Sources

Source: PBT/1/1/48/18B
East Sussex Record Office

Possibly the Same Person?

John Heathfield
Name
The John who made his will in 1707 names an apparently married daughter with the same name as the other John's wife, and it seems likely that daughter had married in 1685 meaning she must have been born by about 1670.

Locations

30/09/1679 Church, Heathfield, Sussex
17/05/1707 Heathfield, Hailsham, Sussex
29/04/1710 Church, Burwash, Sussex
29/04/1710 Mayfield, Sussex
Please note that map data is based on modern streets and house numbers (where a street of that name still exists), and may not reflect the actual historical location.