tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post6853549504429714499..comments2024-03-26T12:01:39.690-07:00Comments on A Family Tapestry: That’s Not How They Explained ItJacqi Stevenshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03471698670217119444noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-26746288952506755702013-09-16T09:36:02.877-07:002013-09-16T09:36:02.877-07:00I've gotten off on more than one genealogical ...I've gotten off on more than one genealogical tangent. It's way too easy so good for you for being able to resist the urge!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14429943996332228949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-36051857968406850642013-09-12T16:47:54.774-07:002013-09-12T16:47:54.774-07:00Yes, a little proper English grammar for our clue ...Yes, a little proper English grammar for our clue there...<br /><br />I suspect there were more than two brothers, but I have to remind myself that that would be getting sucked down a rabbit trail. Must. Not. Go. There.<br /><br />Oh, and "Danahy"? That's only one version. I've found so many others. Steeling myself to avoid temptation. Again.Jacqi Stevenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03471698670217119444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-76435692763036499282013-09-12T08:20:26.083-07:002013-09-12T08:20:26.083-07:00So Mary was a "Danahy."
There were two ...So Mary was a "Danahy."<br /><br />There were two brother(S)... Cornelius and Hugh listed - so the plural seems right.Intense Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08441598926026727682noreply@blogger.com