Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish (Parish Records)
Hi Admin,
Oh My Goodness! Thank you so very much! I had wondered if they were HOLDER cousins, now it seems they are PROBERT(S) cousins... I'm gobsmacked! I'm so glad this is not a terribly common surname.
Cheers,
Aussie
Picking up on the comment that the baptism of Sarah is not FODFHT we have checked and find it under the Surname of ROBERTS. The entry has therefore been checked against the image and we find it is entered as PROBERTS. The database has therefore been updated accordingly.
Complete thread:
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
aussie,
2015-10-25, 08:29
- HOLDER/PROBERT/WILKES -
MPGriffiths,
2015-10-25, 09:45
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
aussie,
2015-10-25, 10:19
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
Mike Pinchin,
2015-10-26, 22:47
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
aussie,
2015-10-27, 06:23
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
aussie,
2015-10-27, 08:52
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
Mike Pinchin,
2015-10-27, 23:28
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish - aussie, 2015-10-28, 20:16
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
Mike Pinchin,
2015-10-27, 23:28
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
aussie,
2015-10-27, 08:52
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
admin,
2015-10-27, 08:32
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish - aussie, 2015-10-27, 10:15
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish - aussie, 2015-10-27, 21:08
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
aussie,
2015-10-27, 06:23
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
Mike Pinchin,
2015-10-26, 22:47
- HOLDER/PROBERT/WILKES - aussie, 2020-05-31, 05:46
- Baptism Jane HOLDER possibly Taynton - 1791 ish -
aussie,
2015-10-25, 10:19
- HOLDER/PROBERT/WILKES -
MPGriffiths,
2015-10-25, 09:45