Starting Sept. 30, 2014, Genealogy.com will be making a big change. GenForum message boards, Family Tree Maker homepages, and the most popular articles will be preserved in a read-only format, while several other features will no longer be available, including member subscriptions and the Shop.
 
Learn more


Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Farley Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: Challange to the traditional Thomas Farley/Jane Sefton lineage
Posted by: Merryanne Pierson (ID *****6994) Date: October 26, 2009 at 09:13:08
In Reply to: Challange to the traditional Thomas Farley/Jane Sefton lineage by Merryanne Pierson of 3423

Correction to my own question. Although it appears that John Farley born ca 1647 is indeed a grandson of Thomas and Jane, Archer is not necessarily his father. Archer may not even be the son of Thomas and Jane's name.

He may belong to George, Thomas' other son. Further research is required. All I can say for certain is that Jane would have been too old to have born John born ca 1647/50. The 12 generations of Farley's can't be correct in assigning John as one of the sons of Thomas and Jane.


Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

http://genforum.genealogy.com/farley/messages/3162.html
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network