Hannah (Hayward) Farrar Holloway
Records and documents: Hannah (Hayward) Farrar Holloway
7 record images, oldest first. Move between them with the Previous and Next buttons or the arrow keys; zoom with + and −. Escape returns to Hannah (Hayward) Farrar Holloway.

Source: Internet Archive (public-domain scan); concordmassachus1635conc.
How it is shown: Complete page as scanned; no crop, no retouch, no search highlight.
Keep in mind: Confirmed. The page says nothing of Farrar or Holloway: the identification of this Hannah with Hannah (Hayward) Farrar Holloway rests on Pierce, Forbes and Forbush Genealogy (1892) p. 23 (Likely).
Image details

Source: Internet Archive (public-domain scan); concordmassachus1635conc.
How it is shown: Complete page as scanned; no crop, no retouch, no search highlight.
Keep in mind: Confirmed. The first month is March in the old-style year, which agrees with Pierce's 'March 5. 1681'.
Image details

Source: Internet Archive (public-domain scan); concordmassachus1635conc.
How it is shown: Complete page as scanned; no crop, no retouch, no search highlight.
Keep in mind: Confirmed. Mary is not on this page (her birth is on p. 25). The three children are not themselves in the tree.
Image details

Source: Internet Archive (public-domain scan); genealogicalhist00ward.
How it is shown: Complete page as scanned; no crop, no retouch, no search highlight.
Keep in mind: Confirmed. Ward gives Meliscent b. 15 Apr 1723 but m. 11 Jan 1727-8 (age 4): an internal oddity flagged, not resolved. The page does not mention a later marriage of Mary to John Fay.
Image details

Source: Internet Archive (public-domain scan); forbesforbushgen00pier.
How it is shown: Complete page as scanned; no crop, no retouch, no search highlight.
Keep in mind: Confirmed. Pierce conflates the widow Hannah (Hayward) Farrar Holloway with her daughter Hannah Holloway, who married Jonathan Forbush (Concord p. 64 gives 2 Jan 1704/5; Pierce prints 1706 and '1705-8'). The Concord record does not make that conflation. THIS COPY carries an earlier reader's pencil marginalia and ink strike-throughs on the page; they are not Pierce's text and are not evidence.
Image details

Source: Internet Archive (public-domain scan); concordmassachus1635conc.
How it is shown: Complete page as supplied; no crop, no retouch, no search highlight.
Keep in mind: A printed transcription; the day-month-year digits are printed in the old style ('5. 1. 81') and were first read as 5 January 1681/2; the record prints no month name, and in the old Massachusetts calendar (first month March) the reading is 5 March 1680/81.
Image details

Source: Internet Archive (public-domain scan); concordmassachus00conc.
How it is shown: Complete page as supplied; no crop, no retouch, no search highlight.
Keep in mind: Printed transcription; Confirmed as printed in Main's review of 2 Oct 2026.
Image details