Find Ancestors
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Nathaniel Cryer c1800
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
CherryBlossom | Report | 24 Apr 2010 19:53 |
Marriage for Matthew |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 20:18 |
So he married Elizabeth Woodbourn why do they list them men then women? |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 20:28 |
Could anyone help find John's Cryers Parent I know I ask alot but I am very gratful for all the help I do try but im so slow finding anything.Shirley |
|||
|
CherryBlossom | Report | 24 Apr 2010 20:58 |
Can't see a baptism for a John Cryer on Freereg - the closest I can get with the soundex on is |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:03 |
I will lookit up hang on |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:10 |
They are a village apart |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:21 |
Sorry but isn't this Johnb.c.1770 is too early for the John who married Hannah could it be his father? |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:25 |
That would of made him about 28 when he got married I could be wrong what do you think? |
|||
|
CherryBlossom | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:29 |
So, you can keep George and Betty Crier as strong possibles for the next generation back. |
|||
|
CherryBlossom | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:35 |
John Crier was baptised in 1757 - married in 1785 - so yes he would have been 28. Not unusual for males to marry at a later age. |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:37 |
Its not a big enough gap for another generation so it must be his parents.Thankyou |
|||
|
CherryBlossom | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:49 |
Okay, so we have |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:52 |
Yes it looks good to me thank you so much. |
|||
|
EVEIE | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:52 |
looked at birth martha baptised 19 jan 1849/50 ok |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
CherryBlossom | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:55 |
Sorry Starr1 - that was a typo - have re-checked the records and its definitely 1749/50 on Freereg. |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:56 |
I have taken that as a misprint/transcribe Dont you agree ? |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 24 Apr 2010 21:57 |
Thanku all specially Ninja Lady Im off to bed now Goodnight. |
|||
|
Shirley | Report | 19 Jun 2010 15:33 |
n |