>Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 13:44:40 -0500 >From: "eleven" <eleven@mfi.net> >Here is that NORTON LINEAGE from 1535 in England to 1962 in Franklin Co., >OH. > >Norton, William b. Eng 1535 (m. Denise Cholmley > >Norton, Thomas b Eng 1570 m. Grace Wells > Thomas Norton b. 15 Sep 1609 (the emigrant, married to Grace Wells) was the son of Robert Norton and Anne Hare, not William and Dionis. This is a common error but an error none-the-less. There are two degrees of separation and a generation between these families. William and Dionis DID have a son named Thomas (born ~1570) but he apparently never left England. >Norton, George b Eng 1605 m. Mary Machias I would love to see real evidence for George being Thomas and Grace's son. I've been looking for some time and haven't found anything. I do have a George Norton (b. 22 Feb 1617 in London) as the son of Richard Norton and Ellen Rowley. Richard was a son of William and Dionis. I show George dying in Salem, MA in 1659. > >Norton, George b. MA 1641 m. Sarah Hart > >Norton, George b. MA 1672 m Hannah Younglove > .....

What evidence do you have that the Thomas born in 1609 to Robert and Anne is the emigrant to Guilford? You say the other Thomas, son of Wm and Dionis, 'apparently' never left England...what's the basis for that statement? Judith Werner Hayward, California, USA : Thomas Norton b. 15 Sep 1609 (the emigrant, married to Grace Wells) was the : son of Robert Norton and Anne Hare, not William and Dionis. This is a : common error but an error none-the-less. There are two degrees of : separation and a generation between these families. William and Dionis DID : have a son named Thomas (born ~1570) but he apparently never left England.