Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
I am in agreement with most of this post, however, I believe that some of the published data, including this post has an error in it. I will try to explain with a simplified line:
John b. 1540
Matthew b. 29 Jun 1565
?Matthew2? b. ??
Michael b. 1600 and brother William b. 1612
There is not really enough years between Matthew Sr. and Michael for another generation. The rest of this line is very well documented (although I don't have it on me, I think I saw it in SLC), and the absence of a birthdate for Matthew2, is a pointer to the fact that there is really only one Matthew, so I believe that the line is John, Matthew, then brothers William and Michael and John and George.
If someone has primary or secondary evidence of the second Matthew, please let me know.
Happy Hunting!
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/barstow/messages/14.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|