DNA Confirmation (or not) of Norton families in Colonial New England
snorton
is to identify every colonial Norton pedigree with DNA.
There's lots of interesting stuff in Connecticut. WE have identified
the Sharpenhoe pedigree, but John Norton of Branford and Farmington
appears to be a different line. Also James Norton of Branford.
Although James links to another noble Norton pedigree.
I can probably shed light on any Norton studies you have.
Here's a link to a Norton Arms study with pedigrees.
http://www.nortonfamily.net/arms.htm
Here is the main Norton page.
http://www.nortonfamily.net/
Scott Norton
taf
> I am the coordinator for the Norton DNA Project. One of our projects
> is to identify every colonial Norton pedigree with DNA.
>
> There's lots of interesting stuff in Connecticut. WE have identified
> the Sharpenhoe pedigree, but John Norton of Branford and Farmington
> appears to be a different line. Also James Norton of Branford.
> Although James links to another noble Norton pedigree.
>
> I can probably shed light on any Norton studies you have.
>
I looked at your DNA data. I must be missing something. Your pedigree
on the DNA page shows four immigrants of the Norton of Sharpenhoe
line, Rev. William and his brother Rev. John, neither of whom have a
DNA type given; John of Branford and Thomas of Guilford, who represent
different types. You identify Thomas's as the Sharpenhoe type, and
conclude there is an error in the Branford Norton pedigree, but if
this is all you have, then it is just as likely that John's represents
the authentic Sharpenhoe Norton haplotype, and that of Thomas is the
interloper. His placement where C.E.Norton put him based on little
more than the assumption that he should belong, has long been
questioned. You appear to need a tie-breaker, a third typed immigrant,
to know which actually represents the Sharpenhoe type? Do you have
more types than are on the site?
taf
Douglas Richardson
I'm a descendant of the 17th Century New World immigrant, Thomas
Norton of Guilford, Connecticut who married in 1631 at Shelton,
Bedfordshire, England to Grace Wells. I've researched this family in
English records and published an article on the English origins of
Thomas Norton. To date I know of no evidence which ties Thomas Norton
of Guilford, Connecticut to the Norton family of Sharpenhoe,
Bedfordshire as claimed on your website. In fact, the parishes of
Shelton and Sharpenhoe are at two different ends of Bedfordshire and
are separated by many miles.
Can you please post your documentary evidence which proves that Thomas
Norton the immigrant is a member of the Sharpenhoe family? If you
have no evidence, can you change Thomas Norton's pedigree as shown on
your website?
I see your website refers to "DNA Results group Norville-Norton." Yet
there are NO Norvilles whatsoever in your study at all. As best I
can determine, your group is EXCLUSIVELY Norton. If you are only
studying the Norton family (and you are), why call it the Norville-
Norton DNA group. Calling a pig a cow doesn't make it so.
Your website further alleges that "the first noble Norton family in
Yorkshire and Durham was the Norville-Norton family sent by William
the Conqueror to put down the rebellion in Durham." Do you have any
evidence to back up this statement? I see none cited on your website.
Lastly, on your website you say if "You have questions, we have
answers." I hope this is true.
Sincerely,
Your Norton kinsman, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
On Jun 5, 1:20 am, snorton <snorton...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am the coordinator for the Norton DNA Project. One of our projects
> is to identify every colonial Norton pedigree with DNA.
>
> There's lots of interesting stuff in Connecticut. WE have identified
> the Sharpenhoe pedigree, but John Norton of Branford and Farmington
> appears to be a different line. Also James Norton of Branford.
> Although James links to another noble Norton pedigree.
>
> I can probably shed light on any Norton studies you have.
>
> Here's a link to a Norton Arms study with pedigrees.http://www.nortonfamily.net/arms.htm
taf
>
> I'm a descendant of the 17th Century New World immigrant, Thomas
> In fact, the parishes of
> Shelton and Sharpenhoe are at two different ends of Bedfordshire and
> are separated by many miles.
Given that the man would eventually go to Connecticut, I don't find
the possibility of him going from one side of the county to the other
all that unpalatable.
> Can you please post your documentary evidence which proves that Thomas
> Norton the immigrant is a member of the Sharpenhoe family?
And you ask this knowing that he doesn't have such evidence, since he
explicitly states that he is using the pedigree derived by C. E.
Norton, who we all know had no such documentation.
> I see your website refers to "DNA Results group Norville-Norton." Yet
> there are NO Norvilles whatsoever in your study at all. As best I
> can determine, your group is EXCLUSIVELY Norton. If you are only
> studying the Norton family (and you are), why call it the Norville-
> Norton DNA group.
Again you know why. A pedigree published in 1859 but at least claiming
to date from the first half of the 17th century makes this Norton/
Norville connection, and it has been followed by many authors since.
Likewise, it appears in the naming of the arms in the 1634 Beds
Visitation. Of course, given that the nature of the pedigree, there is
sufficient reason to reject it as unreliable, but there is no point in
playing dumb about it.
The DNA data may be available to answer this question, a pursuit
unlikely to be forwarded by asking questions to which we already know
the answer.
taf
Douglas Richardson
> And you ask this knowing that he doesn't have such evidence, since he
> explicitly states that he is using the pedigree derived by C. E.
> Norton, who we all know had no such documentation.
Since this concerns my own ancestry, I'm most interested in hearing
Mr. Norton's reply. Mr. Norton can surely speak for himself. By all
means, please let him do so.
DR
taf
> On Jun 5, 1:29 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
>
> > And you ask this knowing that he doesn't have such evidence, since he
> > explicitly states that he is using the pedigree derived by C. E.
> > Norton, who we all know had no such documentation.
>
> Since this concerns my own ancestry, I'm most interested in hearing
> Mr. Norton's reply.
You are unlikely to be the only one with an interest in this study.
You have an odd way of showing your interest, however. Berating him
about the non-DNA material, insisting that he provide a defense for
material that you know cannot be supported, seems unlikely to
encourage a response.
> Mr. Norton can surely speak for himself. By all
> means, please let him do so.
Funny but my post amounted to the same request. Quit nitpicking and
let him respond to the DNA issue rather than distracting him over the
rehashed arguments you were hounding him about.
taf
taf
Douglas Richardson
> Funny but my post amounted to the same request. Quit nitpicking and
> let him respond to the DNA issue rather than distracting him over the
> rehashed arguments you were hounding him about.
Actually I'm interested in Mr. Norton's DNA study AND his Norton
genealogical database.
If Mr. Norton knows of evidence which proves my Thomas Norton's
parentage, I certainly want to know about it. You presume that he has
no evidence. That presumption might be entirely wrong. Once again,
please let Mr. Norton speak for himself.
Mr. Norton says he welcomes people with questions! What a great
attitude.
DR
taf
> If Mr. Norton knows of evidence which proves my Thomas Norton's
> parentage, I certainly want to know about it. You presume that he has
> no evidence. That presumption might be entirely wrong. Once again,
> please let Mr. Norton speak for himself.
Mr. Norton is fully capable of speaking for himself independent of my
actions. That means your request of me has the ring of either
pointless grandstanding or a disingenuous attempt to control this
thread. In fact he does speak for himself right on the web page. That
you choose not to accept this at face value but rather insist on
holding him to the fire until he says 'uncle' seems counterproductive.
taf
Douglas Richardson
< Mr. Norton is fully capable of speaking for himself independent of
my
< actions.
> taf
Good deal.
DR
david
> I can probably shed light on any Norton studies you have.
>
> Here is the main Norton page.http://www.nortonfamily.net/
>
> Scott Norton
Perhaps you can shed some light on the following:
You state that Thomas Norton emigrated to CT in 1639. You show his son
Thomas as being b. 6 Aug 1637 in Guilford CT, 2 years before his
parents emigrated . If you check the IGI (use the Hugh Wallis site at
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hughwallis/IGIBatchNumbers/CountryEngland.htm#PageTitle
– Bedfordshire – Dean, to access it as this cuts out all the dross
submitted by LDS church members) you’ll find baptisms of Norton
children at Dean, Bedfordshire, a mile from Shelton:
Grace Norton bap 13 Jan 1632 Father Thomas
John Norton bap 15 Feb 1634 Father Thomas
Thomas Norton bap 6 Aug 1637 Parents Thomas and Grace
John might well be the John who you show was born c1640 in Guilford.
I agree with DR when he questions the 30 mile move from one end of the
county to the other. Not unheard of, but out of the ordinary for the
average working man. It smacks of the name's right, the date is about
right, it's the same county, so it must be the same Thomas Norton. A
recipe for researching someone else's ancestors! My Beds ancestors
from this period were anything but unwardly mobile, staying in the
same two adjoining parishes for 550 years (other than the adventurous
souls who went to New England on the Mayflower). Shelton was very
close to the county boundaries of Northamptonshire and
Huntingdonshire, neither of which is easy to research as the LDS was
refused permission to film many parish registers. With no suitable
baptism on the IGI in Beds (and Beds baptisms are almost 100%
extracted onto the IGI), it’s probably more likely that Thomas was
from one of those counties than from Sharpenhoe, particularly if, as
TAF points out, his DNA doesn't match with the known Sharpenhoe
family.
Having said all that I can't see what what happened to the Thomas
Norton baptised 1609 in Streatley. There are no burials in Streatley,
nor an obvious marriage.
What was the occupation of Richard Norton, who you show as being born
1596-1600 at Sharpenhow, Kent (???), which presumably is another
error?
David
taf
> I agree with DR when he questions the 30 mile move from one end of the
> county to the other. Not unheard of, but out of the ordinary for the
> average working man. It smacks of the name's right, the date is about
> right, it's the same county, so it must be the same Thomas Norton.
It is worse than that. This identification was made prior to the
discovery of the Dean/Shelton material, so they didn't even have the
county to go on. Just a cluster of immigrants, with the supposition
that this immigrant must also fit with the family.
> . . . , it’s probably more likely that Thomas was
> from one of those counties than from Sharpenhoe, particularly if, as
> TAF points out, his DNA doesn't match with the known Sharpenhoe
> family.
This is not what I said. Rather, we have two immigrants, each linked
by some (doubted by others) to Sharpenhoe, and they have different
DNA. The data does not allow us to conclude which (if either) is the
Sharpenhoe type.
> Having said all that I can't see what what happened to the Thomas
> Norton baptised 1609 in Streatley. There are no burials in Streatley,
> nor an obvious marriage.
This Thomas (rather than the son of Richard) was identified with the
immigrant by Seversmith.
taf
snorton
I am most grateful for all comments. I am not yet up to the
scholarship standards of this list, but given a little time, I'll get
there. The Norton DNA Project has grown from my own Norton line to
include all the Nortons in the world. It's a game of constant catch-
up.
Let me make a few generalizations about Norton.
1st, at this point we have a pretty good look at most of the Norton
lines that emigrated to America during the colonial period.
2nd, It appears that most of the Norton emigrants were nobility and
gentry. Except for Irish Naughton and Norton. A lot of the Norton
lines are Irish, but we have not been able to resolve them to
individual lines.
3rd, While we have a good picture of America, we have very few DNA
tests in England.
Lets look at the candidates for Sharpenhoe Norton.
1) Richard Norton b.abt 1517 > William Norton b.1558 > Thomas Norton
b. 1608, Surry, England .
We have matching DNA results from descendants of two of Thomas' sons.
(John and Thomas) This gives us a Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA)
of Thomas Norton b. 15 Sep 1609 Sharpenhoe. In addition I have a DNA
test from a noble English pedigree that ties to the Sharpenhoe area.
2) Richard Norton b.abt 1517 > William Norton b.1558 Sharpenhoe >
Richard Norton b.1596 in Streatley, > John Norton b. 14 Oct 1657
Branford, CT. First of all we have a DNA test from a Norton who is a
expert genealogist in England who's father and himself were granted
arms. Their pedigree ties to the John of Branford tests.
This confirms this DNA line to the Nortons of Kent.
http://www.nortonfamily.net/arms.htm#chevron1 I can give this a very
high degree of certainty. The tests in America that match this DNA
test all link to James Norton (called Naughton on early records)
James Norton / known as Naughton
b.1703 b.1698 England
m.Susannah Henderson
b. Apr 1703 Hartford, Hartford, Connecticut
d. 15 Apr 1742 Farmington, Hartford, Connecticut
The link from James to John Norton b. 14 Oct 1657 Branford, New Haven,
CT is tenuous. It appears that beginning at James Norton we have a
different Norton DNA line linked to the Nortons of Kent.
3) (another John of Branson candidate) Richard Norton b.abt 1517 >
William Norton b.1558 Sharpenhoe > Richard Norton b.1596 in
Streatley, > John Norton b. 14 Oct 1657 Branford, CT.
I recently received DNA on a pedigree that links with this John
Norton, but is different from what we have identified as the Thomas/
Sharpenhoe DNA signature. We need another test to confirm this DNA
signature and give us a MRCA.
4) Richard Norton b.abt 1517 > William Norton b.1558 Sharpenhoe >
William Norton m. Browst > John Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. May 9, 1606
No DNA tests from this line. I'm looking for male descendants from
this line for a DNA test.
5) Richard Norton b.abt 1517 > William Norton b.1558 Sharpenhoe >
William Norton m. Browst > William Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. 1626
No DNA tests from this line. I'm looking for male descendants from
this line for a DNA test.
6) George Norton Born: 1609 Dean, Bedford, England m. Mary Machias
Salem, MA
This Norton is sometimes linked to Thomas Norton of Guilford, CT.
It's tempting since his birth is reported from Dean, Bedford,
England. Again the DNA is a completely different signature. If
George is really from Dean, Bedford, then we have another DNA
signature for this area.
We know the DNA signature of Thomas of Guilford, CT. We need a test
to confirm Thomas to the Sharpenhoe family. This should come from
candidate 4, 5 or 6. Of from a test in England.
Its easier to herd cats than sort Nortons. Please help correct the
pedigree and identify weak points on this link.
http://www.nortonfamily.net/arms.htm#sharpenhoe
Scott Norton
snorton
Hi Doug,
I live in Provo, so we are not far away. As you know, there is a lot
of confusion with this line. I am truly struggling to find a solid
pedigree. I hope you will help me sort this out.
1) Lets start with Thomas Norton of Guilford, CT and give him a
separate pedigree apart from Sharpenhoe.
2) Norvile. The Sharpenhoe Nortons are the only ones claiming direct
descent from the Norvile. In the "Visitation of London" of 1633 the
Heralds respited the arms of Thomas Norton for want of proofs. This
means that there was not sufficient evidence to substantiat these
arms. But they were allowed in the next year to Robert Norton in
Hertfordshire and to Gravely Norton in Bedfordshire. The Norton's of
Sharpenhoe asserted their pedigree to Sir de Nourvile who came with
William the Conqueror. It is not suprising that these Norton arms
share the the same devices and tinctures as the Norvyle arms. Then
there is the a pedigree done in 1632 by John Philepott that showed up
in the hands of John Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. May 9, 1606.
3) "the first noble Norton family in Yorkshire and Durham was the
Norville-Norton family sent by William the Conqueror to put down the
rebellion in Durham." This comes from the a pedigree done in 1632 by
John Philepott. You'll have to bear with me. This website began as a
hobby and has grown to include all Norton pedigrees. It's hard to
keep revising and up to date with every Norton story. There is some
evidence to support Norvile in Durham. Mostly in land holdings and of
course the marriage with Conyers. I have a candidate for this first
Norton, but I need to dig out the info.
I expect that the information from members of this group will help
sort out the fuzzy data from the internet.
Scott Norton
Renia
I suspect you have underestimated how common a surname Norton is.
1,239 in 1830 United States Federal Census
1,706 in 1840 United States Federal Census
5,512 in 1841 England & Wales Census
32,934 in 1910 United States Federal Census
13,176 in 1911 England & Wales census
24,513 England & Wales, FreeBMD Birth Index, 1837-1915
45,316 England & Wales, Birth Index: 1916-2005
14,318 England & Wales, FreeBMD Death Index: 1837-1915
17,009 England & Wales, Death Index: 1916-2005
snorton
> On 5 June, 09:20, snorton <snorton...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I can probably shed light on any Norton studies you have.
>
> > Here is the main Norton page.http://www.nortonfamily.net/
>
> > Scott Norton
>
> Perhaps you can shed some light on the following:
>
> You state that Thomas Norton emigrated to CT in 1639. You show his son
> Thomas as being b. 6 Aug 1637 in Guilford CT, 2 years before his
Hi David,
You strike at the main problem and that is identifying the best
pedigree for Thomas Norton of Guilford. The link you give for Hugh
Wallis' site is incomplete. I will update my pedigree here with the
best info this group can provide. Including the disputations.
http://www.nortonfamily.net/arms.htm#sharpenhoe
See the replies above to understand were we are with DNA.
I have no info about the occupation of Richard Norton b. 1596.
Scott Norton
snorton
I am very well acquainted with how many Nortons there are. i
concentrate on Norton emigrants during the colonial period of
America. This is an almost manageable number.
We have identified many of the DNA signatures already and sorted out
some real problems. I'm launching into this list to get the best info
I can get.
Scott
wjho...@aol.com
http://www.nortonfamily.net/arms.htm
supposed to be showing us all Norton who were knights?
If so, I don't see the Norton family of Sibsey listed there, unless they are listed in some way I can't tell right off.
They certainly had knights in their family
http://books.google.com/books?id=aPcMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PR1#PPA729,M1
Will Johnson
=
taf
> Lets look at the candidates for Sharpenhoe Norton.
Unfortunately, the placement of many of these men has been questioned.
> 1) Richard Norton b.abt 1517 > William Norton b.1558 > Thomas Norton
> b. 1608, Surry, England .
> We have matching DNA results from descendants of two of Thomas' sons.
> (John and Thomas) This gives us a Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA)
> of Thomas Norton b. 15 Sep 1609 Sharpenhoe. In addition I have a DNA
> test from a noble English pedigree that ties to the Sharpenhoe area.
Three different ancestries have been proposed for Thomas:
A. The first is that with which you lead, but this is based on nothing
but "several immigrant Nortons came from Sharpenhoe, there was a
Thomas in the Sharpenhoe family, there was an immigrant Thomas, they
must be the same." Chronology suggests that the Thomas, son of
William was a generation older than the immigrant (note his father's
birthdate, and that his younger brother Richard has a son b. 1616).
The placement of Thomas here must be dismissed.
B. As the Thomas bap. 15 Sep. 1609, Streatley, son of Robert,
(identified as son of Thomas, son of Thomas, brother of the above
Richard). In this case, chronology matches and this branch of the
family were something more than just yeoman farmers, but it is still
'names-the-same". (Note that you had this bap date, even though you
had the other lineage).
C. None of the above.
As things currently stand, I don't think Thomas can safely be placed
among this kindred.
> 6) George Norton Born: 1609 Dean, Bedford, England m. Mary Machias
> Salem, MA
> This Norton is sometimes linked to Thomas Norton of Guilford, CT.
> It's tempting since his birth is reported from Dean, Bedford,
> England. Again the DNA is a completely different signature. If
> George is really from Dean, Bedford, then we have another DNA
> signature for this area.
Again, George has been placed all over the Sharpenhoe group, all
simply by 'name's-the-same' supposition.
> We know the DNA signature of Thomas of Guilford, CT. We need a test
> to confirm Thomas to the Sharpenhoe family. This should come from
> candidate 4, 5 or 6. Of from a test in England.
So, back to my question. How do we know that John of Branford was NOT
of the Sharpenhoe line? That his type differs from Thomas need not be
a bar, as we don't know that Thomas was of Sharpenhoe. Unfortunately,
I think you need to just set aside all previous placements of
immigrants, go back to the primary documentation and see which, if any
can be reasonably concluded from that evidence. It may well be that
we can't place any of them safely.
taf
snorton
> Scott, is your pagehttp://www.nortonfamily.net/arms.htm
The Norton Arms study is by no means complete. This is a new one for
me. Here is a link explaining the pedigree a bit more. So far I
can't find what arms this line would show.
Here's a link with more history.
I like this link because it points out that most Norton locations are
named after the Norton that lived there rather than the other way
around "Northtown"
http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/t/w/i/Susan-Twigg/PDFGENE1.pdf
4 December, 13 Charles I (1631).—S. P. held at Hickes Hall:—Persons
to be indicted for Recusancy, in not coming to church &c., to
wit ...Mary Lady Norton wife of Sir Walter Norton of Claxbie co.
Lincoln knt
Mary Stourton, who married Walter Norton, Esquire, of Sibsey, Co.
Norfolk. She is mentioned as his sister in the will of her brother,
Francis Stourton. She died in childbed on Wednesday the 23rd of May,
and was buried on Thursday, the 24th of May, 1638, at St. Giles'-in-
the-Fields, Co. Middlesex*.
Do you have any idea of which family Walter ties in with? Any more
pedigree?
Scott Norton
snorton
Here's what I think I'm looking at with John of Branford, CT.
If Thomas of Guilford, CT is not Sharpenhoe and the DNA tests that
link to James Norton/Naughton are Norton of Kent (verified) then I
only have one test that is linked to John of Branford which is
completely inconclusive.
What I need is a confirming test from a John of Branford. I also need
tests from the descendants of John Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. May 9,
1606 and/or William Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. 1626.
Hopefully these tests match and then we will have a Sharpenhoe Norton
DNA signature.
This about sums it up for these Norton lines.
taf
> What I need is a confirming test from a John of Branford. I also need
> tests from the descendants of John Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. May 9,
> 1606 and/or William Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. 1626.
I don't know that much about these ministerial gents, but usually
immigrant ministers attended one of the British universities. Do we
know which one(s)? The uni records sometimes record the father of the
students.
taf
lma...@att.net
Its really amazing that there are readily available sources on these
people,
yet none of them have been mentioned here.
(I guess one of the characteristics of "internet genealogy" is that
contemporary
sources are not used.)
An extensive biography of Rev. John Norton is recorded in
Cotton Mather, _Magnalia Christi Americana_, which can be read here:
Rev. John Norton had NO children (that should have been a well known
fact),
so I dont understand how anyone could possibly try to search for his
descendants.
This is explicitly stated in Mather, item 26, on page 274.
His ancestry is recorded in a pedigree that was supposed to have been
brought over in the colonial period -
I believe theres an extensive discussion of it in _The American
Genealogist_,
volumes 15 and 16.
The descent of this line of Nortons from the Bownest family is
confirmed in Peter Wilson Coldham,
_Lord Mayor's Court of London Depositions Relating to Americans..._,
50.
As for the descent of Walter Norton of Maine, that is recorded in a
patent which names
other Nortons who were residents of Sharpenhoe co. Bedford
Leslie
snorton
> On Jun 8, 2:39 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 8, 2:04 pm, snorton <snorton...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > What I need is a confirming test from a John of Branford. I also need
> > > tests from the descendants of John Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. May 9,
> > > 1606 and/or William Norton (Rev) Boston, MA b. 1626.
>
> > I don't know that much about these ministerial gents, but usually
> > immigrant ministers attended one of the British universities. Do we
> > know which one(s)? The uni records sometimes record the father of the
> > students.
>
> > taf
>
> Its really amazing that there are readily available sources on these
> people,
> yet none of them have been mentioned here.
>
> (I guess one of the characteristics of "internet genealogy" is that
> contemporary
> sources are not used.)
>
> An extensive biography of Rev. John Norton is recorded in
> Cotton Mather, _Magnalia Christi Americana_, which can be read here:
>
>
> Rev. John Norton had NO children (that should have been a well known
> fact),
> so I dont understand how anyone could possibly try to search for his
> descendants.
> This is explicitly stated in Mather, item 26, on page 274.
>
> His ancestry is recorded in a pedigree that was supposed to have been
> brought over in the colonial period -
> I believe theres an extensive discussion of it in _The American
> Genealogist_,
> volumes 15 and 16.
>
> The descent of this line of Nortons from the Bownest family is
> confirmed in Peter Wilson Coldham,
> _Lord Mayor's Court of London Depositions Relating to Americans..._,
> 50.
>
> As for the descent of Walter Norton of Maine, that is recorded in a
> patent which names
> other Nortons who were residents of Sharpenhoe co. Bedford
>
> Leslie
Some of the things that are interesting regarding the Rev John Norton
in Mathers "Magnalia Christi Americana".
1) "An extreme disaster befalling his fathers estate, he left the
University and became at once the Usher..." What was this disaster?
2) "He was born the 6th of May 1606 at Starford in Hartfordshire;
descended of honorable ancestors." Where is Starford? I can't find
any further reference to his pedigree in this work.
3) "The descent of this line of Nortons from the Bownest family is
confirmed in Peter Wilson Coldham,..." Can you provide this info. I
can't access it successfully.
4) "the descent of Walter Norton of Maine, that is recorded in a
patent which names other Nortons who were residents of Sharpenhoe co.
Bedford"
I hope you would provide this info also. Are the other residents of
Bedford identified as to their relationships?
Thanks for all of this. I can see that we have two descendant lines
to pursue for DNA samples.
Scott Norton
Douglas Richardson
< 2) "He was born the 6th of May 1606 at Starford in Hartfordshire;
< descended of honorable ancestors." Where is Starford? I can't find
< any further reference to his pedigree in this work.
This is possibly Bishop's Stortford, Hertfordshire. The parish
records have survived for this parish.
DR
Renia
Those Parish Registers are also available on the IGI at FamilySearch,
but John Norton is not listed among them.
snorton
I have 4 possible Norton families moving into Colonial, CT
1) 1639 Thomas Norton of Guilford. (DNA matches Norton of
Leistershire, Bedforshire and Warwickshire)
2) 1639 Francis Norton of Milford, CT b. abt 1603 (cousin of John
Norton below) (There is a Norton of Kent arms on a signet ring
belonging to Francis Norton Sr. or Jr.)
3) 1644 John Norton of Branford, CT b.abt 1620 (cousin of Francis
above)
4) 1724 James Naughton of Farmington, CT (DNA matches Nortons of
Kent, England) (This DNA line is also found in Rutland, VT)
None of these Norton pedigrees has much claim on the Sharpenhoe
Nortons, which seem to relate to John and William Norton of Boston,
MA. Although, thre may be other family in ME.
david
>
> 4) "the descent of Walter Norton of Maine, that is recorded in a
> patent which names other Nortons who were residents of Sharpenhoe co.
> Bedford"
> I hope you would provide this info also. Are the other residents of
> Bedford identified as to their relationships?
>
Bedfordshire & Luton Archives & Records Service (BLARS) holds wills as
follows
Agnes Norton of Streatley, widow Ref 1583-4/131
Robert Norton of Sharpenhoe, yeoman, Ref 1559: 15/82
William of Streatley Ref R1538: 5/25d
As Streatley parish register/BTs only starts in 1602 the will of Alice
in particular might help shed some light on family relationships.
David
jojo...@gmail.com
The below has me baffled as to what and how the lineage of George Norton when it is said linked to Thomas Norton but different signature. Can you please set me straight?
) George Norton Born: 1609 Dean, Bedford, England m. Mary Machias
Salem, MA
This Norton is sometimes linked to Thomas Norton of Guilford, CT.
It's tempting since his birth is reported from Dean, Bedford,
England. Again the DNA is a completely different signature. If
George is really from Dean, Bedford, then we have another DNA
signature for this area.
Greg Norton