James Fales Arrived in colonies @1630, married Anna Brock @1635. An original settler of Walpole, Massachusetts. Or, depending on source, original settler of Dedham. Guess it depends on what was what in 1650!
Have seen following, probably based on some confusion between which generation of James Fales, as there are many:
James and Ann Brock m. 28-May-1655, Dedham, had:
> 1. James Fales, b. 4 Jul 1656, Dedham, Massachusetts
2. John Fales, b. 5 Oct 1658, Dedham, Massachusetts
3. Mary Fales, b. 30 Aug 1664, Dedham, Massachusetts
> 4. Peter Fales, b. 1668, Dedham, Massachusetts
5. Hannah Fales, b. 16 Jan 1672, Dedham, Massachusetts
6. Martha Fales, b. 28 Oct 1675, Dedham, Massachusetts
7. Rachel Fales, b. 19 Jun 1680, Dedham, Massachusetts
8. Ebenezer Fales, b. 1 Feb 1682, Dedham, Massachusetts
Same source states that James' (who married Anna Brock) was the son of James b. @1600, England
This seems QUITE unlikely, when even that same source quote the Bicknell's 'History of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations' stating the James who married Anna Brock came from Chester, England, and on 10-Sep-1636, signed the Dedham Plantation Covenant. HOWEVER, THAT source, apparently, also claims said James was a soldier in King Philip's War in 1675. Rather an 'old soldier' if the 1600 DOB is correct.
That said, with all the generations of James', I would not be at all surprised if some of the marriages and children have been mixed up over the years, by numerous researchers who, since some generations were so close, incorrectly placed children with the wrong set of parents, or assumed, such as I, that it might be a stretch to see a soldier of 75 years! Hence, no earlier generations to be recorded, nor need their be, at this point.
Indeed, an unknown source was quoted by another, as:
FALES, Nathaniel, of Bradford, Mass., (who was the son of James Fales, (3d), who was the son of James, (2d), who was the son of Jas. 1st, who came from the ancient town of Chester, in England, and settled in Walpole, Mass.) m. Elizabeth Atwood, and died Sept. 28, 1737. His wife, Elizabeth (or Jenney) d. in Bradford, 1782, aged 83 or 84. Their ch. 1, Atwood, b. March 10, 1723, (O. S. as are all the succeeding births of this generation) r. at Amherst, N. S. and Th., and d. at the former place, Feb. 8, 1805, aged about 82. 2, Elizabeth, b. Nov. 21, 1725; m. it is presumed, in Mass., and died March 12, 1808, a. 82. 3, Capt. Nathaniel, b. Jan. 2, 1727; m. Sarah Badger, at Norwich, May 18, 1749; settled in Th., where he r. and d. April 13, 1797, aged 70. 4, Ebenezer, b. Feb. 8, 1729; remained probably in Mass., and d. Nov. 30, 1798, aged ab. 70. 5, James, b. March 4, 1731, d. Feb. 13, 1756. 6, David, Esq., physician, and surveyor, b. June 9, 1733; mar. 1st, Hannah Thorp at Dedham,!
1761, by Rev. Thomas Balch; settled in St. Georges, now Th., m. 2d, to Zibiah Partridge, June 6, 1782, by Mason Wheaton, Esq; & d. April 4, '22. a. ab. 89. 7, Sarah, b. April 6, 1735; m. it is presumed, and remained in Mass; d. Jan. 28, 1817, a. ab. 82. 8 & 9, twins, b. Sept. 21, 1737, Samuel, d. Oct. 21, 1737, and John Brock, d. Sept. 23, 1737.
This appears to be from Savage's Gen. Dict. of New England, based on the layout. However, based on the years mentioned, would be going on a bit longer than Savage's entries. If the above is correct, there is SURELY a missing James generation in THIS database, as of Sep-2006. He was born circa 1600 at
Chester, England. He married
Anna Brock circa 1635 at
Massachusetts, USA.