Dear Bruce, Without a document from that time period stating X was the son of Y, it is still speculation or opinion. Even bits and pieces of historical fact need to be intrepeted or linked by opinion whether by a logical process or by the bias of the writer. I look forward to your enucleation on the subject. I hope you include your sources and thoughts so future researchers can review them in an appropiate manner. The credit, for having told a story so close to historical truth, will then be yours. By and by, my name is John R. Carpenter from La Mesa, CA. John L. Carpenter is a Carpenter Researcher from NH. I know it is hard to keep us apart because we look so much alike. Take care Cousin, John R. Carpenter La Mesa, CA USA Bruce E. Carpenter wrote: > > John: > Let us clarify one essential matter. The results of the > research I have conducted in the last few months > is not "opinion". It is historical fact. When I complete > this project and finally publish the results, it will completely > redefine who this Carpenter family was, and in ways completely > unknown and unsuspected by people like Raymond Carpenter > etc. who largely failed to carefully study the problem. > The credit (among a small group of people for sure) for > having told a story close to historical truth will be mine. > > Bruce E. Carpenter > professor Dear Bruce, Thank you for the bits and pieces. Your opinion has been noted. Ironically it is the same conclusion that those 19th century researchers forwarded. The Carpenters came from the Du Nord region of France (Netherlands, etc.). I am glad to see a consensus of opinion. Please keep those jewels of data coming in. Every piece helps with the Carpenter Family puzzle. Sincerely, John R. Carpenter La Mesa, CA USA