I should clarify. I agree that the John Jr. did not necessarily mean that he was the son of a John Sr. The only thing that seems certain is that he was younger than the other John Roper in New Kent at that time. He may well have been the son of John Sr, but more evidence is needed to verify that. For now take the Jr. off, but the John in New Kent definitely had sons William and Joseph, and a wife Susan.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|