I'm researching the Vernon line, from Quaker Thomas back. I'm using ancestry.com among other sources, and there is a serious problem with the lineage people using this site are working with and I'm wondering if anyone has any other info that may be more accurate.
From Thomas, I go back like this:
James Vernon b 1605 m. Hester Brown b 1618
Hugh Vernon b 1579 m. E Eccleston b 1581
George Vernon b 1550 m. Ellen Yardley b. 1540 (that makes her 10 years older than him?)
Thomas Vernon b 1504 m ? (most have Joan De Torbok listed as his wife, but she was his mother)
Richard de Vernon b 1475 m. Joan de Torbok b 1485
Then it gets really screwy...
The next "Vernon" back everyone has listed as "Jean de Brinon" b. 1450. How is it a de Brinon descends from a male Vernon AND spawns a male Vernon? and he m. Maragaret Swinfen b. 1425 (which makes her 50 years old when she gives birth to his son????)
Then Richard de Vernon b. 1425 (listed as de Brinon's father) m. Margaret Molyneux b. 1312 (which makes her 87 years OLDER than her husband).
I've checked the web and bizarrely, these things are listed everywhere, even tho they are not only improbable, but most likely impossible.
I can't believe this many people are going with wives that are nearly 100 years older than their husbands (and way too old to give birth to anyone), and mothers 50 years old when they are giving birth, as well as some dude thrown in the mix with an entirely different surname than his father and son.
The women listed cannot be correct (or the birth years listed for them are incorrect), and is there some story that goes along with the de Brinon guy or is that also a terrible mistake?
Any info that could help me correct these things would be greatly appreciated.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|